From: Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: xfstests mount options?
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 17:47:24 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161026094724.GT27776@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161024184611.GA83082@google.com>
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 11:46:11AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When starting xfstests without $TEST_DEV mounted, it mounts it using this
> command in _test_mount, called from init_rc:
>
> _mount -t $FSTYP $TEST_OPTIONS $TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS $SELINUX_MOUNT_OPTIONS $* $TEST_DEV $TEST_DIR
In my understanding, TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS is used for TEST_DEV, as
MOUNT_OPTIONS is used for SCRATCH_DEV.
Looking through the git history, TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS was introduced by
commit ab526a6 in 2006 without any documents. It replaced MOUNT_OPTIONS
in _test_mount(). So I think its intention is used as mount options for
TEST_DEV.
>
> This is also used by _test_cycle_mount, which some tests use.
>
> This is inconsistent with the later code in _check_generic_filesystem, called
> after each test, which remounts $TEST_DEV:
>
> _mount_or_remount_rw "$MOUNT_OPTIONS" $device $mountpoint
_check_generic_filesystem is used in both _check_test_fs() and
_check_scratch_fs(), I think it should use different mount options based
on which device it's checking, not use MOUNT_OPTIONS always.
And there's another inconsistency in _require_test()
out=`_mount_or_remount_rw "$MOUNT_OPTIONS" $TEST_DEV $TEST_DIR`
We should use TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS here, because we know we're working on
TEST_DEV in this function.
>
> It is possible to have mount options in $MOUNT_OPTIONS which then are *not*
> included in the options that _test_mount uses.
>
> $TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS is also very strange in that it only appears to ever be set
> when testing CIFS.
Only CIFS set both TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS and MOUNT_OPTIONS to
CIFS_MOUNT_OPTIONS, that means for cifs it's not possible to use
different mount options for TEST_DEV and SCRATCH_DEV if you have
CIFS_MOUNT_OPTIONS set.
Thanks,
Eryu
>
> Which version of the test device mount options is correct? Is it documented
> anywhere what is the correct way to configure the mount options used by
> xfstests?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric
> --
> 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-26 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-24 18:46 xfstests mount options? Eric Biggers
2016-10-26 9:47 ` Eryu Guan [this message]
2016-10-27 0:46 ` Dave Chinner
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=20161026094724.GT27776@eguan.usersys.redhat.com \
--to=eguan@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
/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