On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 12:58:36PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 2/12/25 12:54 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > We want to help capture error messages with _xfs_mkfs_and_mount() on
> > $FULL, to do that we should avoid spamming error messages for things
> > which we know are not fatal. Such is the case of when we try to
> > mkfs a filesystem but before that try to umount the target path.
> > The first umount is just for sanity, so ignore the error messages from
> > it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > common/xfs | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/common/xfs b/common/xfs
> > index 569770fecd53..67a3b8a97391 100644
> > --- a/common/xfs
> > +++ b/common/xfs
> > @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ _xfs_mkfs_and_mount() {
> > local mount_dir=$2
> > mkdir -p "${mount_dir}"
> > - umount "${mount_dir}"
> > + umount "${mount_dir}" >/dev/null 2>&1
> > mkfs.xfs -l size=64m -f "${bdev}" || return $?
> > mount "${bdev}" "${mount_dir}"
> > }
>
> Shouldn't ">/dev/null 2>&1" be added to the _xfs_mkfs_and_mount()
> caller rather than inside the _xfs_mkfs_and_mount() implementation?
> The above patch makes it impossible for any caller to capture the
> stdout output of umount.
That is the point. In this case the umount *can* fail, we do it for
sanity purposes. We don't care if umount failed.
Luis
