* [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() @ 2015-02-26 10:38 Zhaolei 2015-02-26 10:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" Zhaolei 2015-02-26 10:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Lukáš Czerner 0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Zhaolei @ 2015-02-26 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: fstests; +Cc: Zhao Lei From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> We need to check "$1" instead "$SCRATCH_DEV" in this function. Changelog v1->v2: Use tab instead of space to fit new code style. Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> --- common/rc | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc index 1ed9df5..5a8c74d 100644 --- a/common/rc +++ b/common/rc @@ -1288,7 +1288,7 @@ _require_block_device() echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 exit 1 fi - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" == "" ]; then + if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" fi } -- 1.8.5.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 2015-02-26 10:38 [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Zhaolei @ 2015-02-26 10:38 ` Zhaolei 2015-02-26 11:29 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-26 10:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Lukáš Czerner 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Zhaolei @ 2015-02-26 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: fstests; +Cc: Zhao Lei From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> _is_block_dev() will show above warning when "$dev" is not exist. It happened when the program check $TEST_DEV with blank $SCRATCH_DEV which is optional. Changelog v2->v3: Separate __same_block_dev() from _is_block_dev() to make code self documenting. Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Changelog v1->v2: Rewrite _is_block_dev() to make caller code simple. Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> --- common/rc | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc index 5a8c74d..f528c25 100644 --- a/common/rc +++ b/common/rc @@ -945,24 +945,51 @@ _fs_options() ' </proc/mounts } -# returns device number if a file is a block device +# Returns: +# 0: if filename is a block device +# 1: if filename is not a block device +# -1 if argument wrong # _is_block_dev() { - if [ $# -ne 1 ] - then - echo "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 1>&2 - exit 1 - fi + if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then + return -1 + fi + if [ -b "$1" ]; then + return 0 + fi + return 1; +} - _dev=$1 - if [ -L "${_dev}" ]; then - _dev=`readlink -f ${_dev}` - fi +# Returns: +# 0: if the devices are same +# 1: if the devices are not same +# +__same_block_dev() +{ + if [ $# -ne 2 ]; then + return 1 + fi - if [ -b "${_dev}" ]; then - src/lstat64 ${_dev} | $AWK_PROG '/Device type:/ { print $9 }' - fi + _dev1="$1" + _dev2="$2" + + if [ ! -b "$_dev1" -o ! -b "$_dev2" ]; then + return 1 + fi + + if [ -L "${_dev1}" ]; then + _dev1=`readlink -f "$_dev1"` + fi + if [ -L "${_dev2}" ]; then + _dev2=`readlink -f "$_dev2"` + fi + + if [ `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev1"` != `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev2"` ]; then + return 1 + fi + + return 0; } # Do a command, log it to $seqres.full, optionally test return status @@ -1095,19 +1122,16 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck() fi ;; *) - if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "" ] - then - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" - fi - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ] - then - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" - fi - if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ] - then - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" + if ! _is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" + fi + if __same_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV" "$TEST_DEV"; then + _notrun "\$SCRATCH_DEV and \$TEST_DEV are same device" + fi + if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ]; then + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" fi - ;; + ;; esac # mounted? @@ -1167,19 +1191,16 @@ _require_test() fi ;; *) - if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" = "" ] - then - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" - fi - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ] - then - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" - fi - if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ] - then - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" + if ! _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"; then + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" + fi + if __same_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then + _notrun "\$TEST_DEV and \$SCRATCH_DEV are same device" fi - ;; + if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ]; then + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" + fi + ;; esac # mounted? @@ -1288,7 +1309,7 @@ _require_block_device() echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 exit 1 fi - if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then + if ! _is_block_dev "$1"; then _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" fi } @@ -2236,10 +2257,10 @@ _require_scratch_dev_pool() esac for i in $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL; do - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "" ]; then + if ! _is_block_dev "$i"; then _notrun "this test requires valid block disk $i" fi - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ]; then + if __same_block_dev "$i" "$TEST_DEV"; then _notrun "$i is part of TEST_DEV, this test requires unique disks" fi if _mount | grep -q $i; then -- 1.8.5.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 2015-02-26 10:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" Zhaolei @ 2015-02-26 11:29 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-26 12:26 ` Zhao Lei 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-26 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zhaolei; +Cc: fstests On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhaolei wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:38:59 +0800 > From: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > To: fstests@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > _is_block_dev() will show above warning when "$dev" is not exist. > It happened when the program check $TEST_DEV with blank $SCRATCH_DEV > which is optional. > > Changelog v2->v3: > Separate __same_block_dev() from _is_block_dev() to make code > self documenting. > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > Changelog v1->v2: > Rewrite _is_block_dev() to make caller code simple. > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> This is all very confusing. Sometimes you consider links, sometimes you do not. Error messages are missing completely _is_block_dev() does not return device numbers anymore which might be useful. What about just using the original _is_block_dev() as it was intended ? Like this: if [ "`_is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"`" = "`_is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"`" ] Simply use quotes around the function argument so that the function always receives an argument even though it might be empty, but in this case you'll not get the error message and the _is_block_dev() will just return nothing - problem solved ? -Lukas > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > common/rc | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > index 5a8c74d..f528c25 100644 > --- a/common/rc > +++ b/common/rc > @@ -945,24 +945,51 @@ _fs_options() > ' </proc/mounts > } > > -# returns device number if a file is a block device > +# Returns: > +# 0: if filename is a block device > +# 1: if filename is not a block device > +# -1 if argument wrong > # > _is_block_dev() > { > - if [ $# -ne 1 ] > - then > - echo "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 1>&2 > - exit 1 > - fi > + if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then > + return -1 > + fi > + if [ -b "$1" ]; then > + return 0 > + fi > + return 1; > +} > > - _dev=$1 > - if [ -L "${_dev}" ]; then > - _dev=`readlink -f ${_dev}` > - fi > +# Returns: > +# 0: if the devices are same > +# 1: if the devices are not same > +# > +__same_block_dev() > +{ > + if [ $# -ne 2 ]; then > + return 1 > + fi > > - if [ -b "${_dev}" ]; then > - src/lstat64 ${_dev} | $AWK_PROG '/Device type:/ { print $9 }' > - fi > + _dev1="$1" > + _dev2="$2" > + > + if [ ! -b "$_dev1" -o ! -b "$_dev2" ]; then > + return 1 > + fi > + > + if [ -L "${_dev1}" ]; then > + _dev1=`readlink -f "$_dev1"` > + fi > + if [ -L "${_dev2}" ]; then > + _dev2=`readlink -f "$_dev2"` > + fi > + > + if [ `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev1"` != `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev2"` ]; then > + return 1 > + fi > + > + return 0; > } > > # Do a command, log it to $seqres.full, optionally test return status > @@ -1095,19 +1122,16 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck() > fi > ;; > *) > - if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "" ] > - then > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > - fi > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ] > - then > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > - fi > - if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ] > - then > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > + if ! _is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > + fi > + if __same_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV" "$TEST_DEV"; then > + _notrun "\$SCRATCH_DEV and \$TEST_DEV are same device" > + fi > + if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ]; then > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > fi > - ;; > + ;; > esac > > # mounted? > @@ -1167,19 +1191,16 @@ _require_test() > fi > ;; > *) > - if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" = "" ] > - then > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > - fi > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ] > - then > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > - fi > - if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ] > - then > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > + if ! _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"; then > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > + fi > + if __same_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > + _notrun "\$TEST_DEV and \$SCRATCH_DEV are same device" > fi > - ;; > + if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ]; then > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > + fi > + ;; > esac > > # mounted? > @@ -1288,7 +1309,7 @@ _require_block_device() > echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 > exit 1 > fi > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then > + if ! _is_block_dev "$1"; then > _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" > fi > } > @@ -2236,10 +2257,10 @@ _require_scratch_dev_pool() > esac > > for i in $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL; do > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "" ]; then > + if ! _is_block_dev "$i"; then > _notrun "this test requires valid block disk $i" > fi > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ]; then > + if __same_block_dev "$i" "$TEST_DEV"; then > _notrun "$i is part of TEST_DEV, this test requires unique disks" > fi > if _mount | grep -q $i; then > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 2015-02-26 11:29 ` Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-26 12:26 ` Zhao Lei 2015-02-26 13:36 ` Lukáš Czerner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Zhao Lei @ 2015-02-26 12:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Lukáš Czerner'; +Cc: fstests Hi, Lukas Thanks for review. * From: Lukáš Czerner [mailto:lczerner@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 7:30 PM > To: Zhaolei > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhaolei wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:38:59 +0800 > > From: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > To: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > _is_block_dev() will show above warning when "$dev" is not exist. > > It happened when the program check $TEST_DEV with blank $SCRATCH_DEV > > which is optional. > > > > Changelog v2->v3: > > Separate __same_block_dev() from _is_block_dev() to make code self > > documenting. > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > > > Changelog v1->v2: > > Rewrite _is_block_dev() to make caller code simple. > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > This is all very confusing. Sometimes you consider links, sometimes you do not. I always consider symbol links. [-b ...] in _is_block_dev() can work well even if "$1" is link, so we need not call use readlink before. But "stat" command in __same_block_dev() will not return block id if "$1" is link, so we need convert it using readlink. > Error messages are missing completely _is_block_dev() does not return device > numbers anymore which might be useful. > In current code, device number is only used to compare is same device, and function named _is_same_device() seems more suitable. And if we really need to get dev_id in future, maybe add a function named _get_dev_id() that time can make code more readable. > What about just using the original _is_block_dev() as it was intended ? Like > this: > > if [ "`_is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"`" = "`_is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"`" ] > > Simply use quotes around the function argument so that the function always > receives an argument even though it might be empty, but in this case you'll not > get the error message and the _is_block_dev() will just return nothing - > problem solved ? > This way can solve titled problem, this patch changed more code because most of them are restructure around discussion with patch v1. Thanks Zhaolei > -Lukas > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > --- > > common/rc | 101 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > > index 5a8c74d..f528c25 100644 > > --- a/common/rc > > +++ b/common/rc > > @@ -945,24 +945,51 @@ _fs_options() > > ' </proc/mounts > > } > > > > -# returns device number if a file is a block device > > +# Returns: > > +# 0: if filename is a block device > > +# 1: if filename is not a block device # -1 if argument wrong > > # > > _is_block_dev() > > { > > - if [ $# -ne 1 ] > > - then > > - echo "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 1>&2 > > - exit 1 > > - fi > > + if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then > > + return -1 > > + fi > > + if [ -b "$1" ]; then > > + return 0 > > + fi > > + return 1; > > +} > > > > - _dev=$1 > > - if [ -L "${_dev}" ]; then > > - _dev=`readlink -f ${_dev}` > > - fi > > +# Returns: > > +# 0: if the devices are same > > +# 1: if the devices are not same > > +# > > +__same_block_dev() > > +{ > > + if [ $# -ne 2 ]; then > > + return 1 > > + fi > > > > - if [ -b "${_dev}" ]; then > > - src/lstat64 ${_dev} | $AWK_PROG '/Device type:/ { print $9 }' > > - fi > > + _dev1="$1" > > + _dev2="$2" > > + > > + if [ ! -b "$_dev1" -o ! -b "$_dev2" ]; then > > + return 1 > > + fi > > + > > + if [ -L "${_dev1}" ]; then > > + _dev1=`readlink -f "$_dev1"` > > + fi > > + if [ -L "${_dev2}" ]; then > > + _dev2=`readlink -f "$_dev2"` > > + fi > > + > > + if [ `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev1"` != `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev2"` ]; then > > + return 1 > > + fi > > + > > + return 0; > > } > > > > # Do a command, log it to $seqres.full, optionally test return status > > @@ -1095,19 +1122,16 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck() > > fi > > ;; > > *) > > - if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "" ] > > - then > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > - fi > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev > $TEST_DEV`" ] > > - then > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > - fi > > - if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ] > > - then > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > + fi > > + if __same_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV" "$TEST_DEV"; then > > + _notrun "\$SCRATCH_DEV and \$TEST_DEV are same device" > > + fi > > + if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ]; then > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > > fi > > - ;; > > + ;; > > esac > > > > # mounted? > > @@ -1167,19 +1191,16 @@ _require_test() > > fi > > ;; > > *) > > - if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" = "" ] > > - then > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > - fi > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev > $TEST_DEV`" ] > > - then > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > - fi > > - if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ] > > - then > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"; then > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > + fi > > + if __same_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > > + _notrun "\$TEST_DEV and \$SCRATCH_DEV are same device" > > fi > > - ;; > > + if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ]; then > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > > + fi > > + ;; > > esac > > > > # mounted? > > @@ -1288,7 +1309,7 @@ _require_block_device() > > echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 > > exit 1 > > fi > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$1"; then > > _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" > > fi > > } > > @@ -2236,10 +2257,10 @@ _require_scratch_dev_pool() > > esac > > > > for i in $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL; do > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "" ]; then > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$i"; then > > _notrun "this test requires valid block disk $i" > > fi > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ]; then > > + if __same_block_dev "$i" "$TEST_DEV"; then > > _notrun "$i is part of TEST_DEV, this test requires unique disks" > > fi > > if _mount | grep -q $i; then > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 2015-02-26 12:26 ` Zhao Lei @ 2015-02-26 13:36 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-27 1:51 ` Zhao Lei 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-26 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zhao Lei; +Cc: fstests [-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 8346 bytes --] On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhao Lei wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:26:42 +0800 > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > To: 'Lukáš Czerner' <lczerner@redhat.com> > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > Hi, Lukas > > Thanks for review. > > * From: Lukáš Czerner [mailto:lczerner@redhat.com] > > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 7:30 PM > > To: Zhaolei > > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhaolei wrote: > > > > > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:38:59 +0800 > > > From: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > To: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > > > > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > > > _is_block_dev() will show above warning when "$dev" is not exist. > > > It happened when the program check $TEST_DEV with blank $SCRATCH_DEV > > > which is optional. > > > > > > Changelog v2->v3: > > > Separate __same_block_dev() from _is_block_dev() to make code self > > > documenting. > > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > > > > > Changelog v1->v2: > > > Rewrite _is_block_dev() to make caller code simple. > > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > > > This is all very confusing. Sometimes you consider links, sometimes you do not. > > I always consider symbol links. > > [-b ...] in _is_block_dev() can work well even if "$1" is link, so we need not call > use readlink before. > > But "stat" command in __same_block_dev() will not return block id if "$1" is link, > so we need convert it using readlink. > > > Error messages are missing completely _is_block_dev() does not return device > > numbers anymore which might be useful. > > > In current code, device number is only used to compare is same device, > and function named _is_same_device() seems more suitable. > > And if we really need to get dev_id in future, maybe add a function > named _get_dev_id() that time can make code more readable. > > > What about just using the original _is_block_dev() as it was intended ? Like > > this: > > > > if [ "`_is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"`" = "`_is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"`" ] > > > > Simply use quotes around the function argument so that the function always > > receives an argument even though it might be empty, but in this case you'll not > > get the error message and the _is_block_dev() will just return nothing - > > problem solved ? > > > This way can solve titled problem, this patch changed more code because most > of them are restructure around discussion with patch v1. But it still seems to me that using proper quoting fixes the problem without rewriting bunch of code unnecessarily. I've read the discussion and I think you're talking about: "is_block_dev() is used in many places to check whether the block device exists. i.e. I'd suggest that _is_block_dev() should return an empty string to indicate it's not a block device rather than exit if a null." But the function already works this way, you just need to make sure that the argument is passed to the function even if that argument is empty - so you need to use quotes like _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV". Its the unfortunate way bash works. Simply said _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" will return empty string if $TEST_DEV either does not exist or $TEST_DEV itself is empty string. However if someone calls _is_block_dev he'll get an error so he knows that he needs to fix his code. -Lukas Thanks! > > Thanks > Zhaolei > > > -Lukas > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > --- > > > common/rc | 101 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > > > 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > > > index 5a8c74d..f528c25 100644 > > > --- a/common/rc > > > +++ b/common/rc > > > @@ -945,24 +945,51 @@ _fs_options() > > > ' </proc/mounts > > > } > > > > > > -# returns device number if a file is a block device > > > +# Returns: > > > +# 0: if filename is a block device > > > +# 1: if filename is not a block device # -1 if argument wrong > > > # > > > _is_block_dev() > > > { > > > - if [ $# -ne 1 ] > > > - then > > > - echo "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 1>&2 > > > - exit 1 > > > - fi > > > + if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then > > > + return -1 > > > + fi > > > + if [ -b "$1" ]; then > > > + return 0 > > > + fi > > > + return 1; > > > +} > > > > > > - _dev=$1 > > > - if [ -L "${_dev}" ]; then > > > - _dev=`readlink -f ${_dev}` > > > - fi > > > +# Returns: > > > +# 0: if the devices are same > > > +# 1: if the devices are not same > > > +# > > > +__same_block_dev() > > > +{ > > > + if [ $# -ne 2 ]; then > > > + return 1 > > > + fi > > > > > > - if [ -b "${_dev}" ]; then > > > - src/lstat64 ${_dev} | $AWK_PROG '/Device type:/ { print $9 }' > > > - fi > > > + _dev1="$1" > > > + _dev2="$2" > > > + > > > + if [ ! -b "$_dev1" -o ! -b "$_dev2" ]; then > > > + return 1 > > > + fi > > > + > > > + if [ -L "${_dev1}" ]; then > > > + _dev1=`readlink -f "$_dev1"` > > > + fi > > > + if [ -L "${_dev2}" ]; then > > > + _dev2=`readlink -f "$_dev2"` > > > + fi > > > + > > > + if [ `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev1"` != `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev2"` ]; then > > > + return 1 > > > + fi > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > } > > > > > > # Do a command, log it to $seqres.full, optionally test return status > > > @@ -1095,19 +1122,16 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck() > > > fi > > > ;; > > > *) > > > - if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "" ] > > > - then > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > > - fi > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev > > $TEST_DEV`" ] > > > - then > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > > - fi > > > - if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ] > > > - then > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > > + fi > > > + if __same_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV" "$TEST_DEV"; then > > > + _notrun "\$SCRATCH_DEV and \$TEST_DEV are same device" > > > + fi > > > + if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ]; then > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > > > fi > > > - ;; > > > + ;; > > > esac > > > > > > # mounted? > > > @@ -1167,19 +1191,16 @@ _require_test() > > > fi > > > ;; > > > *) > > > - if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" = "" ] > > > - then > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > > - fi > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev > > $TEST_DEV`" ] > > > - then > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > > - fi > > > - if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ] > > > - then > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"; then > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > > + fi > > > + if __same_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > > > + _notrun "\$TEST_DEV and \$SCRATCH_DEV are same device" > > > fi > > > - ;; > > > + if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ]; then > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > > > + fi > > > + ;; > > > esac > > > > > > # mounted? > > > @@ -1288,7 +1309,7 @@ _require_block_device() > > > echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 > > > exit 1 > > > fi > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$1"; then > > > _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" > > > fi > > > } > > > @@ -2236,10 +2257,10 @@ _require_scratch_dev_pool() > > > esac > > > > > > for i in $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL; do > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "" ]; then > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$i"; then > > > _notrun "this test requires valid block disk $i" > > > fi > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ]; then > > > + if __same_block_dev "$i" "$TEST_DEV"; then > > > _notrun "$i is part of TEST_DEV, this test requires unique disks" > > > fi > > > if _mount | grep -q $i; then > > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 2015-02-26 13:36 ` Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-27 1:51 ` Zhao Lei 2015-02-27 9:45 ` Lukáš Czerner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Zhao Lei @ 2015-02-27 1:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Lukáš Czerner'; +Cc: fstests Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: Lukáš Czerner [mailto:lczerner@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 9:36 PM > To: Zhao Lei > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhao Lei wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:26:42 +0800 > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > To: 'Lukáš Czerner' <lczerner@redhat.com> > > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > > > Hi, Lukas > > > > Thanks for review. > > > > * From: Lukáš Czerner [mailto:lczerner@redhat.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 7:30 PM > > > To: Zhaolei > > > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > > > > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhaolei wrote: > > > > > > > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:38:59 +0800 > > > > From: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > To: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > > > Cc: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > Subject: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" > > > > > > > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > > > > > _is_block_dev() will show above warning when "$dev" is not exist. > > > > It happened when the program check $TEST_DEV with blank > > > > $SCRATCH_DEV which is optional. > > > > > > > > Changelog v2->v3: > > > > Separate __same_block_dev() from _is_block_dev() to make code > > > > self documenting. > > > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > > > > > > > Changelog v1->v2: > > > > Rewrite _is_block_dev() to make caller code simple. > > > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > > > > > This is all very confusing. Sometimes you consider links, sometimes you do > not. > > > > I always consider symbol links. > > > > [-b ...] in _is_block_dev() can work well even if "$1" is link, so we > > need not call use readlink before. > > > > But "stat" command in __same_block_dev() will not return block id if > > "$1" is link, so we need convert it using readlink. > > > > > Error messages are missing completely _is_block_dev() does not > > > return device numbers anymore which might be useful. > > > > > In current code, device number is only used to compare is same device, > > and function named _is_same_device() seems more suitable. > > > > And if we really need to get dev_id in future, maybe add a function > > named _get_dev_id() that time can make code more readable. > > > > > What about just using the original _is_block_dev() as it was > > > intended ? Like > > > this: > > > > > > if [ "`_is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"`" = "`_is_block_dev > > > "$TEST_DEV"`" ] > > > > > > Simply use quotes around the function argument so that the function > > > always receives an argument even though it might be empty, but in > > > this case you'll not get the error message and the _is_block_dev() > > > will just return nothing - problem solved ? > > > > > This way can solve titled problem, this patch changed more code > > because most of them are restructure around discussion with patch v1. > > But it still seems to me that using proper quoting fixes the problem without > rewriting bunch of code unnecessarily. I've read the discussion and I think > you're talking about: > > "is_block_dev() is used in many places to check whether the block device exists. > i.e. I'd suggest that _is_block_dev() should return an empty string to indicate > it's not a block device rather than exit if a null." > > But the function already works this way, you just need to make sure that the > argument is passed to the function even if that argument is empty - so you > need to use quotes like _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV". > Its the unfortunate way bash works. > Another discussion is: | From Dave Chinner | > If we want to avoid calling _is_block_dev in a subshell, we can do following change: | > | > _is_block_dev() | > { | > return 1 if "$1" is not block dev | > } | > _same_dev() | > { | > return 1 if "$1" and "$2" are not same dev } | | yes, that's a good idea, too. | And in discussion in v2, Dave Chinner's sample is using return value: | # Returns: | # -1 if no argument passed | # 0 if filename is not a block device | # 1 if filename is a block device. | _is_block_dev() | { | if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then | return -1; | fi | | if [ -b $1 ]; then | return 1; | fi | return 0; | } | It is reason why I changed to use return value in current version. > Simply said > > _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" > > will return empty string if $TEST_DEV either does not exist or $TEST_DEV itself > is empty string. However if someone calls > > _is_block_dev > > he'll get an error so he knows that he needs to fix his code. > These 2 way have the respective advantages. For me, both way is acceptable as long as it can fix titled bug. I'll send v4 based on your suggestion, to provide Dave Chinner a selection. Thanks Zhaolei > -Lukas > Thanks! > > > > > Thanks > > Zhaolei > > > > > -Lukas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > --- > > > > common/rc | 101 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > > > > 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc index 5a8c74d..f528c25 100644 > > > > --- a/common/rc > > > > +++ b/common/rc > > > > @@ -945,24 +945,51 @@ _fs_options() > > > > ' </proc/mounts > > > > } > > > > > > > > -# returns device number if a file is a block device > > > > +# Returns: > > > > +# 0: if filename is a block device # 1: if filename is not a > > > > +block device # -1 if argument wrong > > > > # > > > > _is_block_dev() > > > > { > > > > - if [ $# -ne 1 ] > > > > - then > > > > - echo "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 1>&2 > > > > - exit 1 > > > > - fi > > > > + if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then > > > > + return -1 > > > > + fi > > > > + if [ -b "$1" ]; then > > > > + return 0 > > > > + fi > > > > + return 1; > > > > +} > > > > > > > > - _dev=$1 > > > > - if [ -L "${_dev}" ]; then > > > > - _dev=`readlink -f ${_dev}` > > > > - fi > > > > +# Returns: > > > > +# 0: if the devices are same > > > > +# 1: if the devices are not same > > > > +# > > > > +__same_block_dev() > > > > +{ > > > > + if [ $# -ne 2 ]; then > > > > + return 1 > > > > + fi > > > > > > > > - if [ -b "${_dev}" ]; then > > > > - src/lstat64 ${_dev} | $AWK_PROG '/Device type:/ { print $9 }' > > > > - fi > > > > + _dev1="$1" > > > > + _dev2="$2" > > > > + > > > > + if [ ! -b "$_dev1" -o ! -b "$_dev2" ]; then > > > > + return 1 > > > > + fi > > > > + > > > > + if [ -L "${_dev1}" ]; then > > > > + _dev1=`readlink -f "$_dev1"` > > > > + fi > > > > + if [ -L "${_dev2}" ]; then > > > > + _dev2=`readlink -f "$_dev2"` > > > > + fi > > > > + > > > > + if [ `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev1"` != `stat -c %t,%T "$_dev2"` ]; then > > > > + return 1 > > > > + fi > > > > + > > > > + return 0; > > > > } > > > > > > > > # Do a command, log it to $seqres.full, optionally test return > > > > status @@ -1095,19 +1122,16 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck() > > > > fi > > > > ;; > > > > *) > > > > - if [ -z "$SCRATCH_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = > "" ] > > > > - then > > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > > > - fi > > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev > > > $TEST_DEV`" ] > > > > - then > > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > > > - fi > > > > - if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ] > > > > - then > > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_DEV" > > > > + fi > > > > + if __same_block_dev "$SCRATCH_DEV" "$TEST_DEV"; then > > > > + _notrun "\$SCRATCH_DEV and \$TEST_DEV are same > device" > > > > + fi > > > > + if [ ! -d "$SCRATCH_MNT" ]; then > > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$SCRATCH_MNT" > > > > fi > > > > - ;; > > > > + ;; > > > > esac > > > > > > > > # mounted? > > > > @@ -1167,19 +1191,16 @@ _require_test() > > > > fi > > > > ;; > > > > *) > > > > - if [ -z "$TEST_DEV" -o "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" = "" ] > > > > - then > > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > > > - fi > > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" = "`_is_block_dev > > > $TEST_DEV`" ] > > > > - then > > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > > > - fi > > > > - if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ] > > > > - then > > > > - _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV"; then > > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DEV" > > > > + fi > > > > + if __same_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" "$SCRATCH_DEV"; then > > > > + _notrun "\$TEST_DEV and \$SCRATCH_DEV are same > device" > > > > fi > > > > - ;; > > > > + if [ ! -d "$TEST_DIR" ]; then > > > > + _notrun "this test requires a valid \$TEST_DIR" > > > > + fi > > > > + ;; > > > > esac > > > > > > > > # mounted? > > > > @@ -1288,7 +1309,7 @@ _require_block_device() > > > > echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 > > > > exit 1 > > > > fi > > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then > > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$1"; then > > > > _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" > > > > fi > > > > } > > > > @@ -2236,10 +2257,10 @@ _require_scratch_dev_pool() > > > > esac > > > > > > > > for i in $SCRATCH_DEV_POOL; do > > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "" ]; then > > > > + if ! _is_block_dev "$i"; then > > > > _notrun "this test requires valid block disk $i" > > > > fi > > > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $i`" = "`_is_block_dev $TEST_DEV`" ]; then > > > > + if __same_block_dev "$i" "$TEST_DEV"; then > > > > _notrun "$i is part of TEST_DEV, this test requires unique > disks" > > > > fi > > > > if _mount | grep -q $i; then > > > > > > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" 2015-02-27 1:51 ` Zhao Lei @ 2015-02-27 9:45 ` Lukáš Czerner 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-27 9:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zhao Lei; +Cc: fstests > > Simply said > > > > _is_block_dev "$TEST_DEV" > > > > will return empty string if $TEST_DEV either does not exist or $TEST_DEV itself > > is empty string. However if someone calls > > > > _is_block_dev > > > > he'll get an error so he knows that he needs to fix his code. > > > > These 2 way have the respective advantages. > For me, both way is acceptable as long as it can fix titled bug. > > I'll send v4 based on your suggestion, to provide Dave Chinner a selection. Ok thanks, I think that simply using quotes is better then rewriting the thing and introducing new helpers. But in the end its Dave's decision to make. Thanks! -Lukas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() 2015-02-26 10:38 [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Zhaolei 2015-02-26 10:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" Zhaolei @ 2015-02-26 10:45 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-26 13:38 ` Lukáš Czerner 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-26 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zhaolei; +Cc: fstests On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhaolei wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:38:47 +0800 > From: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > To: fstests@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > We need to check "$1" instead "$SCRATCH_DEV" in this function. > > Changelog v1->v2: > Use tab instead of space to fit new code style. > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Looks good, thanks. Reviewed-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > common/rc | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > index 1ed9df5..5a8c74d 100644 > --- a/common/rc > +++ b/common/rc > @@ -1288,7 +1288,7 @@ _require_block_device() > echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 > exit 1 > fi > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" == "" ]; then > + if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then > _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" > fi > } > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() 2015-02-26 10:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-26 13:38 ` Lukáš Czerner 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Lukáš Czerner @ 2015-02-26 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zhaolei; +Cc: fstests [-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 1787 bytes --] On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Lukáš Czerner wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 11:45:12 +0100 (CET) > From: Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> > To: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Zhaolei wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:38:47 +0800 > > From: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > To: fstests@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() > > > > From: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > > > We need to check "$1" instead "$SCRATCH_DEV" in this function. > > > > Changelog v1->v2: > > Use tab instead of space to fit new code style. > > Suggested by: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > > Looks good, thanks. > > Reviewed-by: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> Based on the discussion around the second patch you need to use proper quotes if [ "`_is_block_dev "$1"`" == "" ]; then -Lukas > > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > --- > > common/rc | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > > index 1ed9df5..5a8c74d 100644 > > --- a/common/rc > > +++ b/common/rc > > @@ -1288,7 +1288,7 @@ _require_block_device() > > echo "Usage: _require_block_device <dev>" 1>&2 > > exit 1 > > fi > > - if [ "`_is_block_dev $SCRATCH_DEV`" == "" ]; then > > + if [ "`_is_block_dev $1`" == "" ]; then > > _notrun "require $1 to be valid block disk" > > fi > > } > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-02-27 9:45 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-02-26 10:38 [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Zhaolei 2015-02-26 10:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] Fix warning of "Usage: _is_block_dev dev" Zhaolei 2015-02-26 11:29 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-26 12:26 ` Zhao Lei 2015-02-26 13:36 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-27 1:51 ` Zhao Lei 2015-02-27 9:45 ` Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-26 10:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] xfstests: fix a typo in _require_block_device() Lukáš Czerner 2015-02-26 13:38 ` Lukáš Czerner
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox