Re: [PATCH -v4 1/1] mdadm/test: Add one test case for raid5 reshape

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 08/30/2017 04:54 PM, Xiao Ni wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jes Sorensen" <jes.sorensen@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "Xiao Ni" <xni@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-raid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 5:19:22 AM
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 1/1] mdadm/test: Add one test case for raid5 reshape

On 07/20/2017 03:58 AM, Xiao Ni wrote:
This case tries to allow raid5 reshape to use backwards direction.
It changes chunksize after reshape and stops the raid. Then starts
the raid again.

Signed-off-by: Xiao Ni <xni@xxxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by:  Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@xxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by:  Zhilong Liu <zlliu@xxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by:  Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
   test           |  7 +++++++
   tests/02r5grow | 17 +++++++++++++++++
   2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)

diff --git a/test b/test
index 87e2df2..98e2981 100755
--- a/test
+++ b/test
@@ -320,6 +320,13 @@ check() {
   		grep -sq "inactive" /proc/mdstat ||
   			die "array is not inactive!"
   		;;
+	# It only can be used when there is only one raid
+	chunk )
+		chunk_size=`awk -F',' '/chunk/{print $2}' /proc/mdstat | awk -F'[a-z]'
'{print $1}'`
+		if [ "$chunk_size" -ne "$2" ] ; then
+			die "chunksize should be $2, but it's $chunk_size"
+		fi
+		;;
   	* )
   		die "unknown check $1"
   		;;
diff --git a/tests/02r5grow b/tests/02r5grow
index 386e82e..ea3101b 100644
--- a/tests/02r5grow
+++ b/tests/02r5grow
@@ -34,3 +34,20 @@ check nosync
   sh tests/testdev $md0 3 $[size/2] 128
mdadm -S $md0
+
+# create a raid5 array and change the chunk
+mdadm -CR $md0 --level raid5 --metadata=1.1 --chunk=32 --raid-disks 3
--size $[size/2] $dev1 $dev2 $dev3
+check wait
+check state UUU
+check chunk 32
+
+mdadm $md0 --grow --chunk=64
+check reshape
+check wait
+check chunk 64
+
+mdadm -S $md0
+mdadm -As
+check state UUU
+check chunk 64
+mdadm -Ss
Hi Xiao,

I don't like the last part running 'mdadm -As' this will auto-assemble
any array in the system and you can get a false test failure because it
will assume the first assembled array is the one you are looking for.
Hi Jes

Is it ok to change mdadm -As to mdadm -A $md0 $dev1 $dev2 $dev3

Small opinion, also change "mdadm -Ss" to "mdadm -S $md0".

Thanks,
-Zhilong

Regards
Xiao
Cheers,
Jes

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux