[Ocfs2-devel] ocfs2-test for v4.3 done

[Junxiao Bi]

On 12/21/2015 09:50 PM, Eric Ren wrote:
> Hi Junxiao,
> 
> Thanks for your sharing, and very appreciated your efforts.
> 
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 11:00:59AM +0800, Junxiao Bi wrote: 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have run a full ocfs2-test(single/multiple/discontig) to v4.3 mainline
>> kernel. The following three issues are found. The first two are
>> regression bugs.
>>
>> 1. https://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1357
>>   Fix merged. Upstream commit 087ffd4eae99("jbd2: fix null committed
>> data return in undo_access")
>>
>> 2. https://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1358
>>   A recursive locking issue, discussing fix in ocfs2-devel.
>>
>> 3. https://oss.oracle.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1359
>>   o2hb-increase-unsteady-iterations.patch to fix this issue, merged by
>> -mm tree
>>
>> I have setup a test env to build and auto do ocfs2 test. With it, Ocfs2
>> for mainline and linux-next will be test regularly, the test status and
>> bugs will be reported to ocfs2-devel. Feel free to take any bug if you
>> are interested, it will be a good start point with ocfs2. Hope this can
>> catch regression bugs earlier before merged by mainline.
> I'm very interested in how your testing env works, could you briefly introduce
> it?
Four vm are used, one for git server, and the other three to build
kernel and run ocfs2 test. Tag a branch and push it to the git server,
the test will be started. The test cases to run can be set in tag message.

>>
>> For the test cases, now only ocfs2-test is supported. Ltp is going to be
>> merged in the future. If any other test cases or benchmark useful to
>> ocfs2 test, please let me know.
> Btw, recently, I did a performance testing on both ocfs2 and gfs2 using iozone. The
> testing has 3 different cases:
> 1. local mode: ocfs2 better than gfs2
> 2. two files mutiple nodes  
> 3. same file mutiple nodes, for 2 and 3 gfs2 better than ocfs2 generally
Can you share the perf data, i am curious about the performance diff?
> Just provide a reference here. I tried to make it as simple as possible,
> leaving all formating and mount options as default, and with fixed-size file(2GB)
> and buffer(4kb). 
> 
> Did you or anyone ever test performance for ocfs2? maybe we can discuss further on
> this topic in future;-)
Yes, a lot of works need to do for ocfs2 performance, to make local
ocfs2 performance more close to ext4, and try best to make cluster ocfs2
performance close to local.

Thanks,
Junxiao.
> 
> Thanks,
> Eric
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Junxiao.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ocfs2-devel mailing list
>> Ocfs2-devel at oss.oracle.com
>> https://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
>>