On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Zorro Lang <zlang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:34:00AM -0400, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:46 AM, Zorro Lang <zlang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > The format of glusterfs' TEST_DEV or SCRATCH_DEV is XXX:XXX or
>> > XXX:/XXX, but xfstests can't accept the latter now. So change
>>
>> Why can't xfstest accept the latter?
>
> Because I use "\w:\w" in commit "4cbc0a0 fstests: add GlusterFS support".
> More details please see below.
>
>>
>> > the regular expression from "\w:\w" to ":/?", to accept more
>> > glusterfs device format.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <zlang@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > According to the feedback from glusterfs developer:
>> >
>> > "Yes, it would be good to have an optional "/" after the ":". It is not
>> > required, but would probably help when someone runs the tests with the
>> > "hostname:/volume" device format."
>> >
>>
>> The developer also said
>> "We mostly use the format of 192.168.1.1:/testvol, matching the way NFS"
>> If we can enforce the more common format which xfstest already expects
>> for nfs*|ceph)
>> Why would we want to support another optional format and have a special
>> test case for it?
>
> Niels is the developer of glusterfs' NFS module (sorry, I forgot its project
> name), he test it likes test NFS:
> mount -t nfs 192.168.1.1:/XXXX /mnt
>
> So he only can use XXXX:/XXX format, because xfstests limit that format
> to mount NFS.
>
>>
>> > Maybe there's a slash before the gluster volume name. This patch
>> > try to support this format.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Zorro
>> >
>> > common/rc | 4 ++--
>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
>> > index edfba5d..e1ab2c6 100644
>> > --- a/common/rc
>> > +++ b/common/rc
>> > @@ -1496,7 +1496,7 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck()
>> > {
>> > case "$FSTYP" in
>> > glusterfs)
>> > - echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -q "\w:\w" > /dev/null 2>&1
>> > + echo $SCRATCH_DEV | egrep -q ":/?" > /dev/null 2>&1
>
> As I know, mount a glusrerfs always do like this:
> mount -t glusterfs 192.169.1.1:testvol /mnt
> or
> mount -t glusterfs 192.169.1.1:/testvol /mnt
>
> So glusterfs can use XXXX:XXX or XXXX:/XXX format, but if mount a nfs,
> we only can use XXXX:/XXX format.
>
> So that's why NFS use `grep -q ":/"`, but glusterfs use `egrep -q ":/?"`
>
I understand.
What I am saying is that if glusterfs *can* use XXXX:/XXX
and a file system tester will dedicate a specific mount for xfstests,
so tester can use the NFS format for that mount and we can require that.
Is that really a big deal for the tester?
If we do that we will have less special cases for format of *_DEV
and I think that is a gain.
--
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
