On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 5:03 PM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2025 at 01:27:32PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> > On 20/2/25 02:19, fdmanana@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > If the test fails or is interrupted after mounting $scratch_dev3 inside
> > > the test filesystem and before unmounting at test_add_device(), we leave
> > > without being unable to unmount the test filesystem since it has a mount
> > > inside it. This results in the need to manually unmount $scratch_dev3,
> > > otherwise a subsequent run of fstests fails since the unmount of the
> > > test device fails with -EBUSY.
> > >
> > > Fix this by unmounting $scratch_dev3 ($seq_mnt) in the _cleanup()
> > > function.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > tests/btrfs/254 | 1 +
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/254 b/tests/btrfs/254
> > > index d9c9eea9..6523389b 100755
> > > --- a/tests/btrfs/254
> > > +++ b/tests/btrfs/254
> > > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ _cleanup()
> > > {
> > > cd /
> > > rm -f $tmp.*
> > > + $UMOUNT_PROG $seq_mnt > /dev/null 2>&1
>
> This should use the _unmount helper that's in for-next.
Sure, it does the same, except that it redirects stdout and stderr to
$seqres.full.
Some tests are still calling $UMOUNT_PROG directly. And that's often
what we want, so that if umount fails we get a mismatch with the
golden output instead of ignoring the failure.
But in this case it's fine.
Anand, since you've already merged this patch into your repo, can you
please replace that line with the following?
_unmount $seq_mnt
Thanks.
>
> --D
>
> > > rm -rf $seq_mnt > /dev/null 2>&1
> > > cleanup_dmdev
> > > }
> >
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> >
