[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS on Fedora i686, armv7hl

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS on Fedora i686, armv7hl
From: Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 12:38:39 -0700
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Test Fedora <test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <530F548C.9060302@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <8A28EF88-012E-4036-BDB6-E76B1CC569A7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <530F548C.9060302@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Feb 27, 2014, at 8:06 AM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 2/26/14, 11:37 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Fedora is considering XFS as their default file system. They support
>> three primary architectures: x86_64, i686, and armv7hl.  Do XFS devs
>> have any reservations about XFS as a default file system on either
>> i686, or arm?
> As Dave said, we rely on others to do ARM testing for the most part,
> though I've certainly jumped in and debugged some issues from time
> to time.
> It'd be super if Fedora could run the xfstests test suite on arm
> as part of QE.  I'd be more than happy to help get that started
> if people are interested.

I don't know that Fedora QA has the resources to do this, but I'll cc the 
Fedora test@ (QA) arm@ lists. If these are highly automatable tests it might be 
possible, if they have the hardware. More likely I think it's that we need some 
ARM community folks to look at splitting up some of this work.

I'm not sure yet what concerns the ARM group might have with XFS either as this 
hasn't been decided, but the Fedora Server product working group is slightly 
leaning toward XFS by default. Performance and CPU hit wise on x86_64, XFS 
seems to match up well with ext4 and maybe even a bit better ratio of 
throughput/CPUtime for booting workload (systemd is parallel!) so if were the 
same on ARM XFS could work out slightly better for them.

Chris Murphy
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>