On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 10:30 PM Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 01:18:05PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > On Thu, 21 Nov 2024, Chuck Lever III wrote: > > > > > > I will note that tmpfs hangs during generic/449 for me 100% > > > of the time; the failure appears unrelated to renames. Do you > > > know if there is regular CI being done for tmpfs? I'm planning > > > to add it to my nightly test rig once I'm done here. > > > > For me generic/449 did not hang, just took a long time to discover > > something uninteresting and eventually declare "not run". Took > > 14 minutes six years ago, when I gave up on it and short-circuited > > the "not run" with the patch below. > > > > (I carry about twenty patches for my own tmpfs fstests testing; but > > many of those are just for ancient 32-bit environment, or to suit the > > "huge=always" option. I never have enough time/priority to review and > > post them, but can send you a tarball if they might of use to you.) > > > > generic/449 is one of those tests which expects metadata to occupy > > space inside the "disk", in a way which it does not on tmpfs (and a > > quick glance at its history suggests btrfs also had issues with it). > > > > [PATCH] generic/449: not run on tmpfs earlier > > > > Do not waste 14 minutes to discover that tmpfs succeeds in > > setting acls despite running out of space for user attrs. > > > > Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > tests/generic/449 | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/tests/generic/449 b/tests/generic/449 > > index 9cf814ad..a52a992b 100755 > > --- a/tests/generic/449 > > +++ b/tests/generic/449 > > @@ -22,6 +22,11 @@ _require_test > > _require_acls > > _require_attrs trusted > > > > +if [ "$FSTYP" = "tmpfs" ]; then > > + # Do not waste 14 minutes to discover this: > > + _notrun "$FSTYP succeeds in setting acls despite running out of space for user attrs" > > +fi > > + > > _scratch_mkfs_sized $((256 * 1024 * 1024)) >> $seqres.full 2>&1 > > _scratch_mount || _fail "mount failed" > > > > -- > > 2.35.3 > > My approach (until I could look into the failure more) has been > similar: > > diff --git a/tests/generic/449 b/tests/generic/449 > index 9cf814ad326c..8307a43ce87f 100755 > --- a/tests/generic/449 > +++ b/tests/generic/449 > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ _require_scratch > _require_test > _require_acls > _require_attrs trusted > +_supported_fs ^nfs ^overlay ^tmpfs > nfs and overlay are _notrun because they do not support _scratch_mkfs_sized > _scratch_mkfs_sized $((256 * 1024 * 1024)) >> $seqres.full 2>&1 > _scratch_mount || _fail "mount failed" > > > I stole it from somewhere else, so it's not tmpfs-specific. I think opt-out for a certain fs makes sense in some tests, but it is prefered to describe the requirement that is behind the opt-out. For example, you thought that nfs,overlay,tmpfs should all opt-out from this test. Why? Which property do they share in common and how can it be described in a generic way? I am not talking about a property that can be checked. Sometimes we need to make groups of filesystems that share a common property that cannot be tested, to better express the requirements. _fstyp_has_non_default_seek_data_hole() is the only example that comes to mind but there could be others. Thanks, Amir.
