On Fri, Jul 05, 2019 at 04:07:57PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> > +_require_scratch_inode_limits()
> > +{
> > + _require_scratch
> > + _scratch_mkfs > /dev/null 2>&1
> > + _scratch_mount
> > + if [ $(_get_free_inode $SCRATCH_MNT) -eq 0 ]; then
> > + _notrun "$FSTYP does not have a fixed number of inodes available"
> > + fi
> > + _scratch_unmount
> > +}
>
> I think testing against $TEST_DIR should be sufficient, so we could
> avoid the mkfs & mount & umount SCRATCH_DEV time.
I was following the pattern that I saw with other similar _require
tests (for example: _require_scratch_shutdown). I *thought* the
reason why this is was done is because if the test only uses the
SCRATCH_DEV, there's no making it a requirement that TEST_DEV be
available --- since IIRC, we do support SCRATCH_DEV being available,
but not TEST_DEV.
I personally don't use xfstests in that way --- when I run xfstests,
TEST_DEV is always available and in some cases, SCRATCH_DEV won't be
present. But I thought that's why _require_test exists --- so that
tests can be skipped if TEST_DEV does not exist.
- Ted
