From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] nfs: Run on btrfs, ext4, xfs
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 00:00:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230504220037.GB4244@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZFO6ywouPkmNKtkr@yuki>
> Hi!
> > nfs_get_remote_path()
> > @@ -210,6 +213,7 @@ nfs_cleanup()
> > grep -q "$local_dir" /proc/mounts && umount $local_dir
> > n=$(( n + 1 ))
> > done
> > + sleep 2
> > n=0
> > for i in $VERSION; do
> > @@ -219,12 +223,15 @@ nfs_cleanup()
> > if tst_net_use_netns; then
> > if test -d $remote_dir; then
> > exportfs -u *:$remote_dir
> > + sleep 1
> > rm -rf $remote_dir
> > fi
> > else
> > tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && exportfs -u *:$remote_dir"
> > + sleep 1
> > tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && rm -rf $remote_dir"
> > fi
> > +
> > n=$(( n + 1 ))
> > done
> Generally I'm not happy about the sleeps in the code, the main problem
> is that the test still may fail in a case that something was slower than
> usuall and we decided to proceed after we slept for a pre-defined
> interval. Ideally these should be replaced with a active waiting, i.e.
> loop that checks some condition 10 times in a second or so. Hoewever I'm
> okay with getting this in so that we manage to have these tests in
> before the release and fixing it later on.
I wonder myself what is wrong and if there is a problem with my code (likely) or
with nfsd or with loop device (Christoph Hellwig has been changing
drivers/block/loop.c quite a lot).
Because if first umount is too early, it does not recover (i.e. tst_umount
contain 50 times trying to umount with 100ms, and that does not help).
I also wonder how should I detect it's ready to be umounted.
I'll have look if losetup "fuser -vm /dev/loop0" would help, but instead of
depending on the device, we'd probably want to look into /proc/mounts, right?
Tomorrow I'll test this:
check_umount()
{
local i
local dir="$1"
local type="${2:-lhost}"
local cmd="grep -q $dir /proc/mounts"
for i in $(seq 50); do
if [ "$type" = "lhost" ]; then
$cmd || return
else
tst_rhost_run -c "$cmd" || return
fi
tst_sleep 100ms
tst_res TWARN "failed to umount '$dir'"
done
}
for i in $VERSION; do
local_dir="$(get_local_dir $i $n)"
grep -q "$local_dir" /proc/mounts && umount $local_dir
# instead of 'sleep 2' below check here:
check_umount "$local_dir"
n=$(( n + 1 ))
done
n=0
for i in $VERSION; do
type=$(get_socket_type $n)
remote_dir="$(get_remote_dir $i $type)"
if tst_net_use_netns; then
if test -d $remote_dir; then
exportfs -u *:$remote_dir
check_umount "$remote_dir" # instead of sleep 1
rm -rf $remote_dir
fi
else
tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && exportfs -u *:$remote_dir"
check_umount "$remote_dir" rhost # instead of sleep 1
tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && rm -rf $remote_dir"
fi
n=$(( n + 1 ))
done
[1] https://gitlab.com/psmisc/psmisc/-/blob/master/src/fuser.c
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>,
linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v5 5/5] nfs: Run on btrfs, ext4, xfs
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 00:00:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230504220037.GB4244@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZFO6ywouPkmNKtkr@yuki>
> Hi!
> > nfs_get_remote_path()
> > @@ -210,6 +213,7 @@ nfs_cleanup()
> > grep -q "$local_dir" /proc/mounts && umount $local_dir
> > n=$(( n + 1 ))
> > done
> > + sleep 2
> > n=0
> > for i in $VERSION; do
> > @@ -219,12 +223,15 @@ nfs_cleanup()
> > if tst_net_use_netns; then
> > if test -d $remote_dir; then
> > exportfs -u *:$remote_dir
> > + sleep 1
> > rm -rf $remote_dir
> > fi
> > else
> > tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && exportfs -u *:$remote_dir"
> > + sleep 1
> > tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && rm -rf $remote_dir"
> > fi
> > +
> > n=$(( n + 1 ))
> > done
> Generally I'm not happy about the sleeps in the code, the main problem
> is that the test still may fail in a case that something was slower than
> usuall and we decided to proceed after we slept for a pre-defined
> interval. Ideally these should be replaced with a active waiting, i.e.
> loop that checks some condition 10 times in a second or so. Hoewever I'm
> okay with getting this in so that we manage to have these tests in
> before the release and fixing it later on.
I wonder myself what is wrong and if there is a problem with my code (likely) or
with nfsd or with loop device (Christoph Hellwig has been changing
drivers/block/loop.c quite a lot).
Because if first umount is too early, it does not recover (i.e. tst_umount
contain 50 times trying to umount with 100ms, and that does not help).
I also wonder how should I detect it's ready to be umounted.
I'll have look if losetup "fuser -vm /dev/loop0" would help, but instead of
depending on the device, we'd probably want to look into /proc/mounts, right?
Tomorrow I'll test this:
check_umount()
{
local i
local dir="$1"
local type="${2:-lhost}"
local cmd="grep -q $dir /proc/mounts"
for i in $(seq 50); do
if [ "$type" = "lhost" ]; then
$cmd || return
else
tst_rhost_run -c "$cmd" || return
fi
tst_sleep 100ms
tst_res TWARN "failed to umount '$dir'"
done
}
for i in $VERSION; do
local_dir="$(get_local_dir $i $n)"
grep -q "$local_dir" /proc/mounts && umount $local_dir
# instead of 'sleep 2' below check here:
check_umount "$local_dir"
n=$(( n + 1 ))
done
n=0
for i in $VERSION; do
type=$(get_socket_type $n)
remote_dir="$(get_remote_dir $i $type)"
if tst_net_use_netns; then
if test -d $remote_dir; then
exportfs -u *:$remote_dir
check_umount "$remote_dir" # instead of sleep 1
rm -rf $remote_dir
fi
else
tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && exportfs -u *:$remote_dir"
check_umount "$remote_dir" rhost # instead of sleep 1
tst_rhost_run -c "test -d $remote_dir && rm -rf $remote_dir"
fi
n=$(( n + 1 ))
done
[1] https://gitlab.com/psmisc/psmisc/-/blob/master/src/fuser.c
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-04 22:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-04 13:14 [PATCH v5 0/5] NFS: test on btrfs, ext4, xfs filesystems Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] nfs_lib.sh: Cleanup local and remote directories setup Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:58 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-04 13:58 ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-04 21:16 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 21:16 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-05 10:42 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-05 10:42 ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-05 10:44 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-05 10:44 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] nfs_lib.sh: Unexport on proper side on netns Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] nfs05.sh: Lower down the default values Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] nfs03.sh: " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-05 12:56 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-05 12:56 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] nfs: Run on btrfs, ext4, xfs Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 13:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 14:01 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-04 14:01 ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-04 22:00 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2023-05-04 22:00 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 22:02 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 22:02 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 23:23 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-04 23:23 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2023-05-05 11:08 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-05 11:08 ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2023-05-05 12:59 ` Petr Vorel
2023-05-05 12:59 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230504220037.GB4244@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=neilb@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.