Re: [PATCH] fstests: btrfs/219 cloned-device mount capability update

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]



On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 11:51 AM Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This test case originally checked for failed cloned device mounts, which
> is no longer relevant after the commit a5b8a5f9f835 ("btrfs: support
> cloned-device mount capability"). So removing the obsolete part.
>
> For older kernels without this commit, the test case still serves its core
> purpose.
>
> Additionally, add this test case back to the auto group which reverts the
> commit e2e7b549380a ("fstests: btrfs/219: remove it from auto group") since
> the previously missing kernel commit 5f58d783fd78 ("btrfs: free device in
> btrfs_close_devices for a single device filesystem") has already been
> integrated.
>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202310251645.5fe5495a-oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  tests/btrfs/219 | 11 +----------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/219 b/tests/btrfs/219
> index b747ce34fcc4..44296c119b0a 100755
> --- a/tests/btrfs/219
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/219
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
>  #
>
>  . ./common/preamble
> -_begin_fstest quick volume
> +_begin_fstest auto quick volume
>
>  # Override the default cleanup function.
>  _cleanup()
> @@ -79,15 +79,6 @@ _mount $loop_dev $loop_mnt > /dev/null 2>&1 || \
>         _fail "Failed to mount the second time"
>  $UMOUNT_PROG $loop_mnt
>
> -# Now we definitely can't mount them at the same time, because we're still tied
> -# to the limitation of one fs_devices per fsid.
> -_btrfs_forget_or_module_reload
> -
> -_mount $loop_dev $loop_mnt > /dev/null 2>&1 || \
> -       _fail "Failed to mount the third time"
> -_mount -o loop $fs_img2 $loop_mnt1 > /dev/null 2>&1 && \
> -       _fail "We were allowed to mount when we should have failed"
> -

For kernels without the cloned-device feature, it's useful to still
test this... We want to catch regressions on stable releases and
downstream (distros).
Rather than removing this code, I would rather run the code only if
the kernel does not support the feature (file
/sys/fs/btrfs/features/temp_fsid does not exist).

Thanks.

>  _btrfs_rescan_devices
>  # success, all done
>  echo "Silence is golden"
> --
> 2.31.1
>




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux