Nirjhar Roy <nirjhar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 11/21/24 13:23, Ritesh Harjani (IBM) wrote:
>> Nirjhar Roy <nirjhar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> _require_scratch_extsize helper function will be used in the
>>> the next patch to make the test run only on filesystems with
>>> extsize support.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy <nirjhar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> common/rc | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
>>> index cccc98f5..995979e9 100644
>>> --- a/common/rc
>>> +++ b/common/rc
>>> @@ -48,6 +48,23 @@ _test_fsxattr_xflag()
>>> grep -q "fsxattr.xflags.*\[.*$2.*\]" <($XFS_IO_PROG -c "stat -v" "$1")
>>> }
>>>
>>> +# This test requires extsize support on the filesystem
>>> +_require_scratch_extsize()
>>> +{
>>> + _require_scratch
>> _require_xfs_io_command "extsize"
>>
>> ^^^ Don't we need this too?
> Yes, good point. I will add this in the next revision.
>>
>>> + _scratch_mkfs > /dev/null
>>> + _scratch_mount
>>> + local filename=$SCRATCH_MNT/$RANDOM
>>> + local blksz=$(_get_block_size $SCRATCH_MNT)
>>> + local extsz=$(( blksz*2 ))
>>> + local res=$($XFS_IO_PROG -c "open -f $filename" -c "extsize $extsz" \
>>> + -c "extsize")
>>> + _scratch_unmount
>>> + grep -q "\[$extsz\] $filename" <(echo $res) || \
>>> + _notrun "this test requires extsize support on the filesystem"
>> Why grep when we can simply just check the return value of previous xfs_io command?
> No, I don't think we can rely on the return value of xfs_io. For ex,
> let's look at the following set of commands which are ran on an ext4 system:
>
> root@AMARPC: /mnt1/test$ xfs_io -V
> xfs_io version 5.13.0
> root@AMARPC: /mnt1/test$ touch new
> root@AMARPC: /mnt1/test$ xfs_io -c "extsize 8k" new
> foreign file active, extsize command is for XFS filesystems only
> root@AMARPC: /mnt1/test$ echo "$?"
> 0
> This incorrect return value might have been fixed in some later versions
> of xfs_io but there are still versions where we can't solely rely on the
> return value.
Ok. That's bad, we then have to rely on grep.
Sure, thanks for checking and confirming that.
-ritesh
