On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 10:30:02PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
> Currently, this case fails on old xfsprogs as below:
> +/var/lib/xfstests/tests/xfs/270: line 51: [: !=: unary operator expected
>
> Getting ro_compat value will report the following error after setting new ro_compat
> value:
> +cache_purge: shake on cache 0x56033fde4920 left 1 nodes!?
> +cache_purge: shake on cache 0x56033fde4920 left 1 nodes!?
> +cache_zero_check: refcount is 1, not zero (node=0x56033fdf9110
>
> Old xfsprogs miss a bugfix
> f4afdcb0ad ("xfs_db: clean up the salvage read callsites in set_cur()").
>
> Here we skip the get step of new ro_comap value when nrext64 feature is supported.
> Also will add a new test to cover this xfsprog bug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/xfs/270 | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/270 b/tests/xfs/270
> index b740c379..5ff83ead 100755
> --- a/tests/xfs/270
> +++ b/tests/xfs/270
> @@ -22,6 +22,10 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck
> # Only V5 XFS disallow rw mount/remount with unknown ro-compat features
> _require_scratch_xfs_crc
>
> +nrext64_supported=0
> +_scratch_mkfs_xfs_supported -m crc=1 -i nrext64 > /dev/null 2>&1 && \
> + nrext64_supported=1
> +
> _scratch_mkfs_xfs >>$seqres.full 2>&1
>
> # set the highest bit of features_ro_compat, use it as an unknown
> @@ -43,13 +47,18 @@ ro_compat=$(echo $ro_compat | \
> _scratch_xfs_set_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "$ro_compat" "sb 0" \
> > $seqres.full 2>&1
>
> -# read the newly set ro compat filed for verification
> -new_ro_compat=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" "sb 0" \
> - 2>/dev/null)
> -
> -# verify the new ro_compat field is correct.
> -if [ $new_ro_compat != $ro_compat ]; then
My personal opinion is -- change above line as:
if [ "$new_ro_compat" != "$ro_compat" ]
to avoid the bash syntax error. Then the failure (on old xfsprogs) correspond
to a known xfsprogs bug. That's good enough.
Thanks,
Zorro
> - echo "Unable to set new features_ro_compat. Wanted $ro_compat, got $new_ro_compat"
> +# Indeed, xfsprogs has a bug here and fixed by commit f4afdcb
> +# ("xfs_db: clean up the salvage read callsites in set_cur()")
> +# Here, we use nrext64 feature as a proxy.
> +if [ $nrext64_supported -eq 1 ]; then
> + # read the newly set ro compat filed for verification
> + new_ro_compat=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field "features_ro_compat" \
> + "sb 0" 2>/dev/null)
> + # verify the new ro_compat field is correct.
> + if [ $new_ro_compat != $ro_compat ]; then
> + echo "Unable to set new features_ro_compat. Wanted $ro_compat, \
> + got $new_ro_compat"
> + fi
> fi
>
> # rw mount with unknown ro-compat feature should fail
> --
> 2.27.0
>
