From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, hughd@google.com, Junho Ryu <jayr@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] xfstests: do not unmount tmpfs during remount
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:07:51 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160211030751.GE19486@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160210232826.GK26922@thunk.org>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 06:28:26PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:07:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > No, it's not really the options that are the problem here. The
> > problem is -o remount vs unmount/mount and what the test is actually
> > expecting.
> >
> > I'd say "_scratch_remount" should do "-o remount" unconditionally
> > (least surprise) and the current _scratch_remount should be changed
> > to something like _scratch_cycle_mount(). That way both can take
> > options, but it's clear they do different things. tmpfs can simply
> > implement them the same way.
>
> Well, I can do that, but it's going to be a huge patch --- the vast
> majority of the calls to _scratch_remount in the tree (over 100) would
> have to be changed to _scratch_cycle_mount, because they are just
> doing a _scratch_umount / _scratch_mount without taking any arguments
> to change the mount option.
Yup, but we do this sort of tree-wide cleanup fairly often if it
makes sense. In this case, it's just an initial patch taht
does sed -i -e 's/_scratch_remount/_scratch_cycle_mount/' ....
And, let's put things in context: changing 108 lines of code is a
pretty damn small patch in the greater scheme of things. Indeed,
it's smaller than most patches that add a new regression test.
A "huge" patch is something like the series Darrick posted earlier
in the week - something like 20 patches, including somewhere in the
order of 30 new tests, a couple of new binary test programs, a heap
of cleanups across all 80-90 existing reflink/dedupe tests, and a
bunch of bug fixes to go with them.
IOWs, s/_scratch_remount/_scratch_cycle_mount/ is the sort of
no-brainer change that takes less time to write, test and review
than it did for me to write this email....
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-11 3:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-10 1:49 [PATCH 00/12] xfstests: fix up various tmpfs failures Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 01/12] check: avoid error messages of tests/$FS does not exist Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 5:45 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 15:34 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 16:28 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-02-10 23:17 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 22:19 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 23:32 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 02/12] common: _scratch_mkfs_sized() for tmpfs Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 6:00 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 15:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 22:37 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 03/12] generic: use mount point instead of device name Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 04/12] generic: add _require_odirect to three more tests Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 9:15 ` Eryu Guan
2016-02-10 16:11 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 22:51 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 23:21 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 05/12] xfstests: do not unmount tmpfs during remount Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 6:07 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 16:07 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 18:04 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 23:07 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 23:28 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-11 3:07 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-02-11 15:25 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-11 17:36 ` Darrick J. Wong
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 06/12] generic: do not unmount before calling _check_scratch_fs() Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 07/12] generic: require fiemap for generic/009 Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 08/12] xfstests: fix generic/312 on tmpfs, ignore /proc/partitions Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 5:54 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 23:39 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-11 2:53 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 09/12] xfstests: generic/079 requires chattr, not xattrs Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 9:09 ` Eryu Guan
2016-02-10 16:09 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 1:49 ` [PATCH 10/12] generic: disable generic/027 for tmpfs Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 5:58 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 15:48 ` Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 23:13 ` Dave Chinner
2016-02-10 1:50 ` [PATCH 11/12] xfstests: add executable permission to tests Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 9:07 ` Eryu Guan
2016-02-10 1:50 ` [PATCH 12/12] xfstests: increase tmpfs memory size Theodore Ts'o
2016-02-10 2:10 ` [PATCH 00/12] xfstests: fix up various tmpfs failures Theodore Ts'o
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=20160211030751.GE19486@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jayr@google.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox