On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:45:51PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:41:01PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, Sep 05, 2018 at 04:37:05PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
Here's a fun one:
+ guestfish -N test-virt-sparsify-in-place-fstrim-unsupported.img=fs:vfat exit + virt-sparsify --in-place test-virt-sparsify-in-place-fstrim-unsupported.img + tee test-virt-sparsify-in-place-fstrim-unsupported.log [ 2.4] Trimming /dev/sda1 [ 7.5] Sparsify in-place operation completed with no errors + grep 'warning:.*fstrim' test-virt-sparsify-in-place-fstrim-unsupported.log FAIL test-virt-sparsify-in-place-fstrim-unsupported.sh (exit status: 1)
We expect (for the purposes of the regression test) that vfat filesystems cannot be trimmed. It turns out that fstrim for vfat has now been implemented in Linux (commit f663b5b38fff) :-) Thanks Wentao Wang (this is actually great for virt-v2v).
So we need to find another filesystem which doesn't support fstrim. Or maybe just delete this regression test.
Thoughts?
Presumably something ancient like ext2 will not support it, and is unlikely to be given it given that its ancient with no active development.
I think it does because we're using the ext4 driver for ext2/3 ...
Yeah, a quick test confirms you're right. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|