On Feb 09, 2022 / 14:31, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 09:33:01PM +0900, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote: > > The test case generic/204 calls _scratch_mkfs to get data block size and > > i-node size of the filesystem and obtained data block size is passed to > > the following _scratch_mfks_sized call as an option. However, the > > _scratch_mkfs call is unnecessary since the sizes can be obtained by > > _scratch_mkfs_sized call without the data block size option. > > > > Also the _scratch_mkfs call is harmful when the _scratch_mkfs succeeds > > and the _scratch_mkfs_sized fails. In this case, the _scratch_mkfs > > leaves valid working filesystem on scratch device then following mount > > and IO operations can not detect the failure of _scratch_mkfs_sized. > > This results in the test case run with unexpected test condition. > > > > Hence, remove the _scratch_mkfs call and the data block size option for > > _scratch_mkfs_sized call. > > > > Suggested-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@xxxxxxx> > > Looks ok, assuming you've verified that fstests with FSTYP=xfs doesn't > regress... > > Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks for reviewing. I tested the test case with FSTYP=xfs on a few devices and 3 variety of MKFS_OPTIONS (no option, "-b size=1024 -i size=512" and "-b size=4096 -i size=2048") and all passed. Also I ran whole fstests with FSTYP=xfs, and confirmed that this change does not cause additional failure. -- Best Regards, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
