On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 09:28:44AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote: > On Sep 07, 2021 / 18:15, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2021 at 04:41:16PM +0900, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote: > > > When SCRATCH_DEV is not set and the test case does not call > > > _require_scratch*() before _require_dm_target(), _require_block_device() > > > > That is the bug that needs fixing. > > Thanks for the comment. Do you mean the test cases (generic/628 and generic/629) > need fix to call _require_scratch*() before _require_dm_target()? I think that Yes. Indeed, generic/628 does: _require_dm_target error _require_scratch_reflink and g629 does: _supported_fs generic _require_dm_target error _require_xfs_io_command "chattr" "s" _require_xfs_io_command "copy_range" _require_scratch i.e. these two cases are just incorrectly ordered require rules. Oh, and a quick check of all the dm_target tests: $ git grep -l _require_dm_target tests/ > t.t $ git grep -l _require_scratch `cat t.t` > t.tt $ diff -u t.t t.tt $ Every test that has require_dm_target rule also has a _require_scratch rule in it somewhere... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
