On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 07:11:42PM +0800, Chung-Chiang Cheng wrote: > Hi Filipe, > > > > +_require_scratch > > > +_require_chattr C > > > +_require_chattr c > > > > This require, for chattr c, is not needed, since the test never calls > > chattr with +c or -c. > > > > It also misses a call to: > > > > _require_attrs > > > > Due to the calls to setfattr and lsattr. > > Thanks for your notification. I'll fix these issues. > > > > root 15:43:50 /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests (master)> diff -u /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests/tests/btrfs/264.out /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests/results//btrfs/264.out.bad > > --- /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests/tests/btrfs/264.out 2022-04-19 14:49:03.845696283 +0100 > > +++ /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests/results//btrfs/264.out.bad 2022-04-19 15:43:50.413816742 +0100 > > @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ > > QA output created by 264 > > SCRATCH_MNT/foo --- > > SCRATCH_MNT/foo Compression_Requested > > -SCRATCH_MNT/foo --- > > +SCRATCH_MNT/foo Dont_Compress > > SCRATCH_MNT/foo Compression_Requested > > -SCRATCH_MNT/foo --- > > +SCRATCH_MNT/foo Dont_Compress > > SCRATCH_MNT/foo Compression_Requested > > SCRATCH_MNT/bar No_COW > > setfattr: SCRATCH_MNT/bar: Invalid argument > > root 15:43:52 /home/fdmanana/git/hub/xfstests (master)> > > > > So the test needs to be updated and tested on a recent kernel. > > Other than that, it looks fine to me. > > I can see why my output is different from yours. I tested this item with > the latest upstream kernel, but my `chattr` comes from e2fsprogs-1.45.5, > which does not yet support Dont_Compress. This test relies on a recent > chattr, but `_require_attrs` does not check its version. In any case, I > will send a v2 patch based on the latest chattr. Ah, that's interesting. Indeed, I tested on a box with e2fsprogs 1.46.5. Switching to 1.45.5, the test passes after the btrfs fix is applied. Looking at the e2fsprogs git history the behaviour changed in 1.46.2: commit 1f4a5aba59f39a33a84152b5ae3ec0a5657b12a1 Author: Lennart Poettering <lennart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu Feb 25 12:33:35 2021 -0500 chattr/lsattr: expose FS_NOCOMP_FL (aka EXT2_NOCOMPR_FL) Before that, lsattr never printed anything if the 'no compress' bit was set. So generally test cases for fstests are written such that the test passes with any version of a particular tool, or it requires a minimum version to run (and is skipped on older versions). We do the former approach using filters on the output of a tool, converting the output from an older version to match the output of a new version. Though in this case it would be tricky, because we really want to distinguish between having the 'no compress' bit set versus not having it set. And setting the value 'no' or 'none' for the btrfs.compression xattr, means setting the 'no compress' bit, therefore we want to verify it's set. Making the test require e2fsprogs 1.46.2+, is tricky: lsattr has no '--version' flag to query the version, the only way would be to use distro specific commands to check the e2fsprogs version (e.g. "apt-cache policy e2fsprogs" on debian for example). The only way I can think of now is to add a require helper that tests the output of lsattr after setting 'no compress' - if it ouputs 'Dont_Compress', then it's 1.46.2+, otherwise something older. That's complex, so a simple way would be to make the test fail if compression is still set after the setfattr, instead of relying on the exact output of lsattr. Something like this: $SETFATTR_PROG -n btrfs.compression -v no "$test_file" |& _filter_scratch $LSATTR_PROG -l "$test_file" | grep -q 'Compression_Requested' [ $? -eq 0 ] && echo "Compression is still set in the file" With a comment somewhere before mentioning the behaviour change in e2fsprogs 1.46.2, and removing the lsattr output from the golden output file (264.out). This way the test serves its purpose, to test we can not set both compress and nodatacow, and runs with any version of e2fsprogs. 1.46.2 is about 1 year old, and most enterprise distros are very likely using an older version - we want the test to be able to run on them. Thanks. > > Thanks.
