On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 06:23:16AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Cephfs is introducing a new mount device syntax. Fix the fstests
> infrastructure to handle the new syntax correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> common/config | 8 ++++++++
> common/rc | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> v2: more rigorous check for ceph mount device in _check_device
>
> diff --git a/common/config b/common/config
> index e0a5c5df58ff..2b357746476b 100644
> --- a/common/config
> +++ b/common/config
> @@ -537,6 +537,14 @@ _check_device()
> # 9p and virtiofs mount tags are just plain strings, so anything is allowed
> # tmpfs doesn't use mount source, ignore
> ;;
> + ceph)
> + # ceph has two different possible syntaxes for mount devices. The
> + # network URL check above catches the legacy syntax. Check for the
> + # new-style syntax here.
> + if ( echo $dev | grep -qEv "=/" ); then
> + _fatal "common/config: $name ($dev) is not a valid ceph mount string"
> + fi
> + ;;
I have not objection with this, if the maintainer prefer:
- if [ -b "$dev" ] || ( echo $dev | grep -qE ":|//" ); then
+ if [ -b "$dev" ] || ( echo $dev | grep -qE ":|//|=/" ); then
# block device or a network url
return 0
fi
> overlay)
> if [ ! -d "$dev" ]; then
> _fatal "common/config: $name ($dev) is not a directory for overlay"
> diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> index 7973ceb5fdf8..4fa0b818d840 100644
> --- a/common/rc
> +++ b/common/rc
> @@ -1592,7 +1592,7 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck()
> _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT"
> fi
> ;;
> - nfs*|ceph)
> + nfs*)
> echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -q ":/" > /dev/null 2>&1
> if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "$?" != "0" ]; then
> _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV"
> @@ -1601,6 +1601,21 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck()
> _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT"
> fi
> ;;
> + ceph)
> + if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" ]; then
> + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV"
> + fi
> + echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -q "=/" > /dev/null 2>&1
> + if [ "$?" != "0" ]; then
> + echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -q ":/" > /dev/null 2>&1
> + if [ "$?" != "0" ]; then
Why not combine two "if condition" into one, likes:
echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -Eq "=/|:/" >/dev/null 2>&1
if [ "$?" != "0" ] ....
(Sorry I didn't metion this last time...)
Same below:
> + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV"
> + fi
> + fi
> + if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ]; then
> + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT"
> + fi
> + ;;
> pvfs2)
> echo $SCRATCH_DEV | grep -q "://" > /dev/null 2>&1
> if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "$?" != "0" ]; then
> @@ -1770,7 +1785,7 @@ _require_test()
> _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR"
> fi
> ;;
> - nfs*|ceph)
> + nfs*)
> echo $TEST_DEV | grep -q ":/" > /dev/null 2>&1
> if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "$?" != "0" ]; then
> _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV"
> @@ -1779,6 +1794,21 @@ _require_test()
> _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR"
> fi
> ;;
> + ceph)
> + if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" ]; then
> + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV"
> + fi
> + echo $TEST_DEV | grep -q "=/" > /dev/null 2>&1
> + if [ "$?" != "0" ]; then
> + echo $TEST_DEV | grep -q ":/" > /dev/null 2>&1
> + if [ "$?" != "0" ]; then
> + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV"
> + fi
> + fi
> + if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ]; then
> + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR"
> + fi
> + ;;
> cifs)
> echo $TEST_DEV | grep -q "//" > /dev/null 2>&1
> if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "$?" != "0" ]; then
> --
> 2.33.1
>
