xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: btrfs/003: stat the dev we're removing to make sur

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: btrfs/003: stat the dev we're removing to make sure its' really gone
From: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 13:31:19 -0400
Cc: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=fusionio.com; s=default; t=1377106281; bh=H3j7wtRrS/ue1nWtG+dgnA1CXoBxmbtCzYY66rxowtI=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=Glpu1CJ92aKQkBACVymMfXGHMyy9m+m7i6sxfHeBy63JGHdFxUc7Gd7aoZfXLVeeE WCCArPOzhrQCmMzhrB4E2xAPGT4gF2rIPN8qSj2/RV5nk4IkMn8k8jlc5GEm7zGBea 4cD3EGtOO1yi1bZKBJ0HVzOL7VaS0dg/g9LZvvck=
In-reply-to: <5214EE7F.8090507@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1377101015-3070-1-git-send-email-jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <5214EE7F.8090507@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01)
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:44:47AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 8/21/13 11:03 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > I've been periodically failing btrfs/003 because my box sometimes takes a 
> > little
> > longer to unregister the device when we remove it and so the output from 
> > btrfs
> > dev show doesn't match what we are wanting since it still sees the device.  
> > To
> > fix this just stat and sleep if we still see the device node and only 
> > continue
> > once udev or whatever actually removes the device node so that we don't get
> > random failures.  Thanks,
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  tests/btrfs/003 |    6 ++++++
> >  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/003 b/tests/btrfs/003
> > index 5c88651..dba1a32 100755
> > --- a/tests/btrfs/003
> > +++ b/tests/btrfs/003
> > @@ -145,6 +145,12 @@ _test_replace()
> >     _devmgt_remove ${DEVHTL}
> >     dev_removed=1
> >  
> 
> This should probably go into _devmgt_remove,
> and possibly the reverse in _devmgmt_add as well, with
> a comment explaining what it's doing?
> 
> Otherwise someone else will run into the same problem down the line.
> 

No, the next guy will have to go as much pain and annoyance as I did to make
sure he is worthy of the fix.  Thanks,

Josef

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