On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:29 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 02, 2015 at 10:05:40PM +0100, Filipe David Manana wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Omer Zilberberg <omzg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Test was not run because directory parameter was omitted. >> > Also return value was not tested, so this problem was not caught. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Omer Zilberberg <omzg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> >> Tested-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> >> >> > --- >> > tests/generic/076 | 4 +++- >> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/tests/generic/076 b/tests/generic/076 >> > index aa0aae0..3e1aa1a 100755 >> > --- a/tests/generic/076 >> > +++ b/tests/generic/076 >> > @@ -74,9 +74,11 @@ echo "*** test concurrent block/fs access" >> > cat $SCRATCH_DEV >/dev/null & >> > pid=$! >> > >> > -FSSTRESS_ARGS=`_scale_fsstress_args -p 2 -n 2000 $FSSTRESS_AVOID` >> > +FSSTRESS_ARGS=`_scale_fsstress_args -d $SCRATCH_MNT -p 2 -n 2000 $FSSTRESS_AVOID` >> > echo "run fsstress with args: $FSSTRESS_ARGS" >>$seqres.full >> > $FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS >>$seqres.full >> > +rc=$? >> > +[ $rc != 0 ] && echo "fsstress returned $rc - see $seqres.full" >> >> run_check $FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS >> >> Would also do it (some other tests do this). > > Please don't encourage run_check usage - it's cargo-cult programming > at it's worst. It stops people from thinking about what errors they > actually need to care about and capture exactly via other methods > (such as output filtering). > > To demonstrate: fsstress only ever returns non-zero when there's a > config or setup problem. That's exactly why here I don't see a problem with using run_check. Had we been using it, or checking the exit value with some other way, we would have know the test wasn't doing what is supposed to do (as Omer replied). Sure run_check aborts the test immediately if an error happens, preventing further test code from running, but in this case the test is not doing anything else after calling fsstress. Thanks. > This basically never happens once the test > has been written. Further, fsstress does not collect runtime errors > from child processes because it is designed to trigger errors and > still continue onwards. Finally, the output stream is really only > debug information, so that's not useful for anythign other than > debugging, either. > > Hence there is never any need to check exit status of fsstress, nor > do anything with the output stream except redirect it to the > debug output file or the bit bucket. > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Filipe David Manana, "Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves. That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
