[PATCH v2] btrfs: Add test for the single-dev feature

[PATCH v2] btrfs: Add test for the single-dev feature

[Guilherme G. Piccoli]

The SINGLE_DEV btrfs feature allows to mount the same filesystem
multiple times, at the same time. This is the fstests counter-part,
which checks both mkfs/btrfstune (by mounting the FS twice), and
also unsupported scenarios, like device replace / remove.

Suggested-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
Suggested-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
---

V2:
- Rebased against v2023.09.03 / changed test number to 301;

- Implemented the great suggestions from Anand, which definitely
made the test more clear and concise;

-Cc'ing linux-btrfs as well.

Thanks in advance for reviews / comments!
Cheers,

Guilherme


 tests/btrfs/301     | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 tests/btrfs/301.out |  5 +++
 2 files changed, 99 insertions(+)
 create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/301
 create mode 100644 tests/btrfs/301.out

diff --git a/tests/btrfs/301 b/tests/btrfs/301
new file mode 100755
index 000000000000..5f8abdbe157a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/btrfs/301
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+#! /bin/bash
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+# Copyright (c) 2023 Guilherme G. Piccoli (Igalia S.L.).  All Rights Reserved.
+#
+# FS QA Test 301
+#
+# Test for the btrfs single-dev feature - both mkfs and btrfstune are
+# validated, as well as explicitly unsupported commands, like device
+# removal / replacement.
+#
+. ./common/preamble
+_begin_fstest auto mkfs quick
+. ./common/filter
+_supported_fs btrfs
+
+_require_btrfs_mkfs_feature single-dev
+_require_btrfs_fs_feature single_dev
+
+_require_scratch_dev_pool 2
+_scratch_dev_pool_get 1
+_spare_dev_get
+
+_require_command "$BTRFS_TUNE_PROG" btrfstune
+_require_command "$WIPEFS_PROG" wipefs
+
+# Helper to mount a btrfs fs
+# Arg 1: device
+# Arg 2: mount point
+mount_btrfs()
+{
+	$MOUNT_PROG -t btrfs $1 $2
+	[ $? -ne 0 ] && _fail "mounting $1 on $2 failed"
+}
+
+SPARE_MNT="${TEST_DIR}/${seq}/spare_mnt"
+mkdir -p $SPARE_MNT
+
+
+# Part 1
+# First test involves a mkfs with single-dev feature enabled.
+# If it succeeds and mounting that FS *twice* also succeeds,
+# we're good and continue.
+$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SCRATCH_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SPARE_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+
+_scratch_mkfs "-b 300M -O single-dev" >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+dd if=$SCRATCH_DEV of=$SPARE_DEV bs=300M count=1 conv=fsync >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+
+mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT
+mount_btrfs $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT
+
+$UMOUNT_PROG $SPARE_MNT
+$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT
+
+
+# Part 2
+# Second test is similar to the first with the difference we
+# run mkfs with no single-dev mention, and make use of btrfstune
+# to set such feature.
+$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SCRATCH_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SPARE_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+
+_scratch_mkfs "-b 300M" >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+$BTRFS_TUNE_PROG --convert-to-single-device $SCRATCH_DEV
+dd if=$SCRATCH_DEV of=$SPARE_DEV bs=300M count=1 conv=fsync >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+
+mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT
+mount_btrfs $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT
+
+$UMOUNT_PROG $SPARE_MNT
+$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT
+
+
+# Part 3
+# Final part attempts to run some single-dev unsupported commands,
+# like device replace/remove - it they fail, test succeeds!
+mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT
+
+$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG device replace start $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT 2>&1 \
+	| _filter_scratch
+
+$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG device remove $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT 2>&1 \
+	| _filter_scratch
+
+$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT
+
+_spare_dev_put
+_scratch_dev_pool_put 1
+
+# success, all done
+status=0
+echo "Finished"
+
+exit
diff --git a/tests/btrfs/301.out b/tests/btrfs/301.out
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c65604fecc5f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/btrfs/301.out
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+QA output created by 301
+ERROR: ioctl(DEV_REPLACE_STATUS) failed on "SCRATCH_MNT": Invalid argument
+
+ERROR: error removing device 'SCRATCH_DEV': Invalid argument
+Finished
-- 
2.42.0

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs: Add test for the single-dev feature

[Josef Bacik]

On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 05:06:56PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> The SINGLE_DEV btrfs feature allows to mount the same filesystem
> multiple times, at the same time. This is the fstests counter-part,
> which checks both mkfs/btrfstune (by mounting the FS twice), and
> also unsupported scenarios, like device replace / remove.
> 
> Suggested-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@oracle.com>
> Suggested-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
> ---
> 
> V2:
> - Rebased against v2023.09.03 / changed test number to 301;
> 
> - Implemented the great suggestions from Anand, which definitely
> made the test more clear and concise;
> 
> -Cc'ing linux-btrfs as well.
> 
> Thanks in advance for reviews / comments!
> Cheers,
> 
> Guilherme
> 
> 
>  tests/btrfs/301     | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  tests/btrfs/301.out |  5 +++
>  2 files changed, 99 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/301
>  create mode 100644 tests/btrfs/301.out
> 
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/301 b/tests/btrfs/301
> new file mode 100755
> index 000000000000..5f8abdbe157a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/301
> @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# Copyright (c) 2023 Guilherme G. Piccoli (Igalia S.L.).  All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test 301
> +#
> +# Test for the btrfs single-dev feature - both mkfs and btrfstune are
> +# validated, as well as explicitly unsupported commands, like device
> +# removal / replacement.
> +#
> +. ./common/preamble
> +_begin_fstest auto mkfs quick
> +. ./common/filter

Normally we group all the require'd stuff together
> +_supported_fs btrfs
> +
> +_require_btrfs_mkfs_feature single-dev
> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature single_dev
> +
> +_require_scratch_dev_pool 2
> +_scratch_dev_pool_get 1
> +_spare_dev_get
> +
> +_require_command "$BTRFS_TUNE_PROG" btrfstune
> +_require_command "$WIPEFS_PROG" wipefs
> +
> +# Helper to mount a btrfs fs
> +# Arg 1: device
> +# Arg 2: mount point
> +mount_btrfs()
> +{
> +	$MOUNT_PROG -t btrfs $1 $2
> +	[ $? -ne 0 ] && _fail "mounting $1 on $2 failed"
> +}
> +
> +SPARE_MNT="${TEST_DIR}/${seq}/spare_mnt"
> +mkdir -p $SPARE_MNT
> +
> +
> +# Part 1
> +# First test involves a mkfs with single-dev feature enabled.
> +# If it succeeds and mounting that FS *twice* also succeeds,
> +# we're good and continue.
> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SCRATCH_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SPARE_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +_scratch_mkfs "-b 300M -O single-dev" >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +dd if=$SCRATCH_DEV of=$SPARE_DEV bs=300M count=1 conv=fsync >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT

You can just use _scratch_mount here, since you want to handle failures just

_scratch_mount || _fail "failed to mount scratch mount"

> +mount_btrfs $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT

Instead use _mount here

_mount $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT || _fail "failed to mount spare dev"

> +
> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SPARE_MNT
> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT

_scratch_unmount

> +
> +
> +# Part 2
> +# Second test is similar to the first with the difference we
> +# run mkfs with no single-dev mention, and make use of btrfstune
> +# to set such feature.
> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SCRATCH_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SPARE_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +_scratch_mkfs "-b 300M" >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +$BTRFS_TUNE_PROG --convert-to-single-device $SCRATCH_DEV
> +dd if=$SCRATCH_DEV of=$SPARE_DEV bs=300M count=1 conv=fsync >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT

_scratch_mount

> +mount_btrfs $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT

_mount

> +
> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SPARE_MNT
> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT

_scratch_unmount

> +
> +
> +# Part 3
> +# Final part attempts to run some single-dev unsupported commands,
> +# like device replace/remove - it they fail, test succeeds!
> +mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT

_scratch_mount

> +
> +$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG device replace start $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT 2>&1 \
> +	| _filter_scratch
> +
> +$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG device remove $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT 2>&1 \
> +	| _filter_scratch
> +
> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT

_scratch_unmount

> +
> +_spare_dev_put
> +_scratch_dev_pool_put 1
> +
> +# success, all done
> +status=0
> +echo "Finished"

Don't need this bit.  Thanks,

Josef

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs: Add test for the single-dev feature

[Anand Jain]

Further to Josef's review.


>> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/301 b/tests/btrfs/301
>> new file mode 100755
>> index 000000000000..5f8abdbe157a
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tests/btrfs/301
>> @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
>> +#! /bin/bash
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>> +# Copyright (c) 2023 Guilherme G. Piccoli (Igalia S.L.).  All Rights Reserved.
>> +#
>> +# FS QA Test 301
>> +#
>> +# Test for the btrfs single-dev feature - both mkfs and btrfstune are
>> +# validated, as well as explicitly unsupported commands, like device
>> +# removal / replacement.
>> +#
>> +. ./common/preamble
>> +_begin_fstest auto mkfs quick
>> +. ./common/filter
> 
> Normally we group all the require'd stuff together
>> +_supported_fs btrfs
>> +

>> +_require_btrfs_mkfs_feature single-dev
>> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature single_dev

>> +
>> +_require_scratch_dev_pool 2
>> +_scratch_dev_pool_get 1
>> +_spare_dev_get
>> +
>> +_require_command "$BTRFS_TUNE_PROG" btrfstune
>> +_require_command "$WIPEFS_PROG" wipefs
>> +
>> +# Helper to mount a btrfs fs
>> +# Arg 1: device
>> +# Arg 2: mount point
>> +mount_btrfs()
>> +{
>> +	$MOUNT_PROG -t btrfs $1 $2
>> +	[ $? -ne 0 ] && _fail "mounting $1 on $2 failed"
>> +}
>> +

>> +SPARE_MNT="${TEST_DIR}/${seq}/spare_mnt"

Please use small case for test local variables.

spare_mnt=="${TEST_DIR}/${seq}/spare_mnt"


Thanks, Anand



>> +mkdir -p $SPARE_MNT
>> +
>> +
>> +# Part 1
>> +# First test involves a mkfs with single-dev feature enabled.
>> +# If it succeeds and mounting that FS *twice* also succeeds,
>> +# we're good and continue.
>> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SCRATCH_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SPARE_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +
>> +_scratch_mkfs "-b 300M -O single-dev" >> $seqres.full 2>&1

>> +dd if=$SCRATCH_DEV of=$SPARE_DEV bs=300M count=1 conv=fsync >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +
>> +mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT
> 

> You can just use _scratch_mount here, since you want to handle failures just
> 
> _scratch_mount || _fail "failed to mount scratch mount"
> 
>> +mount_btrfs $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT
> 
> Instead use _mount here
> 
> _mount $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT || _fail "failed to mount spare dev"
> 
>> +
>> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SPARE_MNT
>> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT
> 
> _scratch_unmount
> 



>> +
>> +
>> +# Part 2
>> +# Second test is similar to the first with the difference we
>> +# run mkfs with no single-dev mention, and make use of btrfstune
>> +# to set such feature.
>> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SCRATCH_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +$WIPEFS_PROG -a $SPARE_DEV >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +
>> +_scratch_mkfs "-b 300M" >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +$BTRFS_TUNE_PROG --convert-to-single-device $SCRATCH_DEV
>> +dd if=$SCRATCH_DEV of=$SPARE_DEV bs=300M count=1 conv=fsync >> $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +
>> +mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT
> 
> _scratch_mount
> 
>> +mount_btrfs $SPARE_DEV $SPARE_MNT
> 
> _mount
> 
>> +
>> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SPARE_MNT
>> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT
> 
> _scratch_unmount
> 
>> +
>> +
>> +# Part 3
>> +# Final part attempts to run some single-dev unsupported commands,
>> +# like device replace/remove - it they fail, test succeeds!
>> +mount_btrfs $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT
> 
> _scratch_mount
> 
>> +
>> +$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG device replace start $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT 2>&1 \
>> +	| _filter_scratch
>> +
>> +$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG device remove $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT 2>&1 \
>> +	| _filter_scratch
>> +
>> +$UMOUNT_PROG $SCRATCH_MNT
> 
> _scratch_unmount
> 
>> +
>> +_spare_dev_put
>> +_scratch_dev_pool_put 1
>> +
>> +# success, all done
>> +status=0
>> +echo "Finished"
> 
> Don't need this bit.  Thanks,
> 
> Josef

Re: [PATCH v2] btrfs: Add test for the single-dev feature

[Guilherme G. Piccoli]

On 06/09/2023 11:45, Anand Jain wrote:
> 
> Further to Josef's review.
> 

Thanks both Anand and Josef, I'll implement all the changes in the next
iteration, hopefully having then the proper name for the feature
(instead of single-dev heh).

Cheers,


Guilherme