[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Lsf] [PATCH] xfstests-bld: Simplify determination of number of CPUs

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Lsf] [PATCH] xfstests-bld: Simplify determination of number of CPUs in build-all
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 12:21:25 -0700
Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx>, Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, lsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <533DB140.8010103@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1395997399-3000-1-git-send-email-sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> <20140328161806.GA31772@xxxxxxxxx> <20140331025148.GF16336@dastard> <20140401023711.GE4911@xxxxxxxxx> <20140401222823.GJ17603@dastard> <20140402142620.GA6901@xxxxxxxxx> <20140403011411.GL16336@dastard> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1404031102310.2124@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <CALCETrU=JWigDSv6ymepS2tjL+EkO98VDC03-RSPuhQVk3yvZA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140403173504.GB23737@xxxxxxxxx> <533DB140.8010103@xxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4/3/14, 11:35 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>>  - There's an undocumented way to write results outside the source
>>> tree called RESULT_BASE.  It would be great if it were documented and
>>> spelled consistently.
> I'm not actually certain that it was intended to be used this way.
> See 1686f9ab "xfstests: Introduce a results directory"
> which explains just where this variable came from and what it's
> for...

Yeah.  A real solution should just create and overmount results.

Unfortunately, AFAICT it's currently impossible to create a mountpoint
with no underlying dentry or to overmount a symlink, so this can be a
bit awkward.

>>>  - SCRATCH_MNT needs to be in /etc/fstab.  I think that this should be
>>> changed or documented.  If the latter, then SCRATCH_DEV seems
>>> redundant.
> Hm, I've never needed SCRATCH_MNT in /etc/fstab...
>> The various test scripts do need to be able to find the device where
>> the file system lives, and parsing /etc/fstab would be awkward.  So if
>> your comment is that either the /etc/fstab entry shouldn't be
>> required, or the xfstests runtime environment should be able to derive
>> $SCRATCH_DEV automatically from $SCRATCH_MNT, or vice versa, instead
> I guess I don't know why you'd expect to derive one from the other...


If $SCRATCH_MNT is specified, then the line in /etc/fstab is
unnecessary.  If $SCRATCH_MNT is not specified, then /etc/fstab will
do the trick.

What does not work is specifying $SCRATCH_DIR [sic] but not adding an
fstab entry.  Oops.


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