On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 06:42:00PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 10:53:36AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > >> > >> Eryu and all, > >> > >> I wanted to ask what is the common practice for introducing tests for > >> know issues > >> that are *about* to be solved. > >> > >> What is the preferred timing for merging these sort of tests? > >> Is it productive to have these tests merged before a fix is merged to master? > >> Before a fix is queued for next? > >> Before a fix is available? > > > > Basically new regression tests will be merged as soon as possible, as > > long as there're no objections from reviewers or all comments are > > addressed. > > > > One exception is that for tests that could crash latest maintainer's > > tree (even there's a known fix), I'd perfer letting the fix go upstream > > first, so that the test doesn't break anyone's tests by crashing all the > > testing hosts. It's great if the test author could give a notification > > on the test to say that the fix has been merged, so the test could be > > merged too. I'll watch the patch status too, but maybe not so timely. > > > > Nothing of a sort lurking with the tests I am planning to write. > Just tests that check for "Non-standard behavior" of overlayfs, > some of it described in Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.txt. > > > > >> > >> FYI, the fix for the test in this patch (test ro/rw fd data inconsistencies) > >> is not queued for next yet, but I am hoping it will be. > >> Miklos? > > > > FYI, this test is already in my last pull request to Dave. > > > > Eryu, > > I am getting this error when running my test with an older xfs_io (4.3.0). > I generated the good output with xfs_io from Dave's for-next branch (4.8.0). > > Have you any idea why in one setup I see the commands echoed > to output and not in the other? I'm also using latest for-next branch, so I didn't notice this issue either. I guess xfs_io changed its behavior on when to print \n in interactive mode, but I didn't dig into the history. > > I realize that the use of redirecting commands from here document > to xfs_io has not been used in xfstests before, but I could not find > another way to use 'open' commands, which are needed for this test. > > Amir. > > overlay/016 - output mismatch (see > /home/amir/src/xfstests-dev/results//overlay/016.out.bad) > --- tests/overlay/016.out 2016-12-01 12:19:02.710370574 +0200 > +++ /home/amir/src/xfstests-dev/results//overlay/016.out.bad > 2016-12-01 18:29:23.684327009 +0200 > @@ -1,12 +1,22 @@ > QA output created by 016 > -xfs_io> xfs_io> xfs_io> wrote 16/16 bytes at offset 0 > +xfs_io> open -r foo > +xfs_io> open foo > +xfs_io> pwrite -S 0x61 0 16 > +wrote 16/16 bytes at offset 0 > XXX Bytes, X ops; XX:XX:XX.X (XXX YYY/sec and XXX ops/sec) > ... I did find a better way to call open either, but if all we care about is the output from reading the file, then we can check that explicitly and ignore other outputs. e.g. --- a/tests/overlay/016 +++ b/tests/overlay/016 @@ -61,6 +61,8 @@ mkdir -p $lowerdir echo "This is old news" > $lowerdir/foo echo "This is old news" > $lowerdir/bar +echo "Silence is golden" + _scratch_mount cd $SCRATCH_MNT @@ -72,7 +74,7 @@ cd $SCRATCH_MNT # write to rwfd # read from rofd # -$XFS_IO_PROG << EOF | _filter_xfs_io +$XFS_IO_PROG << EOF | grep "old" open -r foo open foo pwrite -S 0x61 0 16 @@ -86,7 +88,7 @@ EOF # write to rwfd # read from mapped memory # -$XFS_IO_PROG << EOF | _filter_xfs_io +$XFS_IO_PROG << EOF | grep "old" open -r bar mmap -r 0 16 open bar diff --git a/tests/overlay/016.out b/tests/overlay/016.out index 52b8cd7..aa2526b 100644 --- a/tests/overlay/016.out +++ b/tests/overlay/016.out @@ -1,12 +1,2 @@ QA output created by 016 -xfs_io> xfs_io> xfs_io> wrote 16/16 bytes at offset 0 -XXX Bytes, X ops; XX:XX:XX.X (XXX YYY/sec and XXX ops/sec) -xfs_io> [000] foo (foreign,non-sync,non-direct,read-only) - 001 foo (foreign,non-sync,non-direct,read-write) -xfs_io> 00000000: 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa -read 16/16 bytes at offset 0 -XXX Bytes, X ops; XX:XX:XX.X (XXX YYY/sec and XXX ops/sec) -xfs_io> xfs_io> xfs_io> xfs_io> xfs_io> wrote 16/16 bytes at offset 0 -XXX Bytes, X ops; XX:XX:XX.X (XXX YYY/sec and XXX ops/sec) -xfs_io> 00000000: 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa -xfs_io> \ No newline at end of file +Silence is golden This should work for both old and new version of xfs_io. Thanks, Eryu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
