xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [BULK] Re: [PATCH] xfstests: unmount scratch mnt in test 307

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [BULK] Re: [PATCH] xfstests: unmount scratch mnt in test 307
From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 11:50:11 -0400
Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>, Josef Bacik <JBacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fusionio.com; s=default; t=1372261813; bh=Ptcs9oICVBr26Pk0Wr5/VE7mHPqJutpI6MK+HadOhC0=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=R+hf71EoJPQlW+y69npmkp8B/7LztBjssMQdkfF7NzPkdl3uoYiwcYMb4JQOKHk7k 3J44if0URpEnGKXTk9t4tzYfqzbS4XcEgEMpjiXcp4e409x1etAr5M0tmN67mbZF2x 7Kg/xgWX9ce4dkVWSReHQsykBzjrbA4340FPIHXY=
In-reply-to: <20130503232721.GA19978@dastard>
References: <1367611895-6852-1-git-send-email-jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <51841AC5.3090309@xxxxxxxxxx> <20130503232721.GA19978@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01)
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 07:27:21PM -0400, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 03:15:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> > On 5/3/13 3:11 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > So if you have a mount command that doesn't use /etc/mtab then it will 
> > > spit out
> > > a different device for the mounted device.  So say we have
> > > 
> > > SCRATCH_DEV_POOL="/dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc"
> > > 
> > > we will turn this into
> > > 
> > > SCRATCH_DEV="/dev/sda"
> > > SCRATCH_DEV_POOL="/dev/sdb /dev/sdc"
> > > 
> > > and then when you mkfs this you do _scratch_mkfs $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL which 
> > > turns
> > > into this
> > > 
> > > mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sda
> > > 
> > > becuase we do
> > > 
> > > mkfs $* $SCRATCH_DEV
> > > 
> > > Then btrfs will always show the lowest devid in /proc/mounts to maintain
> > > consistency, so even though we do mount /dev/sda $SCRATCH_MNT, you will 
> > > see
> > > /dev/sdb as the mounted device in /proc/mounts.  So then say the next 
> > > test wants
> > > to just use $SCRATCH_DEV, it will do _require_scratchdev which will check 
> > > to see
> > > if $SCRATCH_DEV is mounted, which it will look like it is not because
> > > /proc/mounts shows /dev/sdb instead of /dev/sda, and so it won't umount
> > > $SCRATCH_MNT, and then that test will fail because we can't mkfs the 
> > > device
> > > because it is busy.  I reproduced this on a box that doesn't use 
> > > /etc/mtab by
> > > doing
> > > 
> > > ./check btrfs/307 generic/015
> > > 
> > > and 015 would fail.  With this patch it passes now.  Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  tests/btrfs/307 |    1 +
> > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/307 b/tests/btrfs/307
> > > index 87314c6..15157b3 100644
> > > --- a/tests/btrfs/307
> > > +++ b/tests/btrfs/307
> > > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ _cleanup()
> > >  {
> > >      cd /
> > >      rm -f $tmp.*
> > > +    umount $SCRATCH_MNT
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  # get standard environment, filters and checks
> > > 
> > 
> > This seems fine for this particular test.
> > 
> > Is it really a hard requirement that each test unmount SCRATCH_[DEV|MNT] if 
> > it used it?
> > If so, fine... the README does indicate this.
> > 
> > But I wonder if we can make it a little more foolproof by updating 
> > _require_scratch
> > to handle this situation more gracefully?
> 
> It already tries to unmount $SCRATCH_DEV, and will through an error
> if it's not mounted on $SCRATCH_MNT. I guess the opposite checks are
> necessary in this case i.e. check that SCRATCH_MNT is not mounted,
> and through an error if it's not SCRATCH_DEV that is mounted
> there...
> 

Just realized this never went in and I had forgotten to address y'alls comments,
so I've sent another patch that accomplishes what you asked for and fixes my
problem.  Thanks,

Josef

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [BULK] Re: [PATCH] xfstests: unmount scratch mnt in test 307, Josef Bacik <=