public inbox for fstests@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] common/rc: teach _scratch_mkfs to handle mkfs option conflicts
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 07:00:13 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161124200013.GT31101@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161124160643.2438-1-eguan@redhat.com>

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:06:43AM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> Currently in _scratch_mkfs only xfs and ext4 could handle the mkfs
> failure caused by conflicts between $MKFS_OPTIONS and mkfs options
> specified by tests, because of _scratch_mkfs_xfs and
> _scratch_mkfs_ext4. This is a very useful functionality that allows
> tests to specify mkfs options safely and to test specific fs
> configurations, without worrying about mkfs failures caused by these
> options.
> 
> Now teach _scratch_mkfs to handle such mkfs option conflicts for
> other filesystems too, i.e. mkfs again only with mkfs options
> specified by tests. Also add the ability to filter unnecessary
> messages from mkfs stderr.

Nice!

.....
> +	local extra_mkfs_options=$*
> +	local mkfs_cmd=""
> +	local mkfs_filter=""
> +	local mkfs_status
> +
> +	case $FSTYP in
> +	xfs)
> +		_scratch_mkfs_xfs $extra_mkfs_options
> +		;;
> +	nfs*)
> +		# unable to re-create NFS, just remove all files in
> +		# $SCRATCH_MNT to avoid EEXIST caused by the leftover files
> +		# created in previous runs
> +		_scratch_cleanup_files
> +		;;
> +	cifs)
> +		# unable to re-create CIFS, just remove all files in
> +		# $SCRATCH_MNT to avoid EEXIST caused by the leftover files
> +		# created in previous runs
> +		_scratch_cleanup_files
> +		;;
> +	ceph)
> +		# Don't re-create CephFS, just remove all files
> +		_scratch_cleanup_files
> +		;;
> +	overlay)
> +		# unable to re-create overlay, remove all files in $SCRATCH_MNT
> +		# to avoid EEXIST caused by the leftover files created in
> +		# previous runs
> +		_scratch_cleanup_files
> +		;;
> +	tmpfs)
> +		# do nothing for tmpfs
> +		;;
> +	ext4)
> +		_scratch_mkfs_ext4 $extra_mkfs_options
> +		;;
> +	udf)
> +		mkfs_cmd="$MKFS_UDF_PROG"
> +		mkfs_filter="cat"
> +		;;
> +	btrfs)
> +		mkfs_cmd="$MKFS_BTRFS_PROG"
> +		mkfs_filter="cat"
> +		;;
> +	ext2|ext3)
> +		mkfs_cmd="$MKFS_PROG -t $FSTYP -- -F"
> +		mkfs_filter="grep -v -e ^Warning: -e \"^mke2fs \""
> +		;;
> +	f2fs)
> +		mkfs_cmd="$MKFS_F2FS_PROG"
> +		mkfs_filter="cat"
> +		;;
> +	ocfs2)
> +		mkfs_cmd="yes | $MKFS_PROG -t $FSTYP --"
> +		mkfs_filter="grep -v -e ^mkfs\.ocfs2"
> +		;;
> +	*)
> +		mkfs_cmd="yes | $MKFS_PROG -t $FSTYP --"
> +		mkfs_filter="cat"
> +		;;
> +	esac
> +	mkfs_status=$?

I suspect that $? can be undefined at this point - it's value is set
by whatever the last command was run, and not all the cases above
run a command.  This might be better handled by something like:

	case $FSTYP in
	nfs*|cifs|ceph|overlay)
		# unable to re-create this fstyp, just remove all files in
		# $SCRATCH_MNT to avoid EEXIST caused by the leftover files
		# created in previous runs
		_scratch_cleanup_files
		return 0
		;;
	tmpfs)
		# do nothing
		return 0
		;;
	ext4)
		_scratch_mkfs_ext4 $extra_mkfs_options
		return $?
		;;
	xfs)
		_scratch_mkfs_xfs $extra_mkfs_options
		return $?
		;;
	udf)
		mkfs_cmd="$MKFS_UDF_PROG"
		mkfs_filter="cat"
		;;
	.....
> +
> +	# return immediately if FSTYP is handled by dedicated helpers
> +	if [ -z "$mkfs_cmd" ]; then
> +		return $mkfs_status
> +	fi

And then this can go as well.

> +
> +	# save mkfs output in case conflict means we need to run again.
> +	# only the output for the mkfs that applies should be shown
> +	eval "$mkfs_cmd $MKFS_OPTIONS $extra_mkfs_options $SCRATCH_DEV" \
> +		2>$tmp.mkfserr 1>$tmp.mkfsstd
> +	mkfs_status=$?
> +
> +	# a mkfs failure may be caused by conflicts between $MKFS_OPTIONS and
> +	# $extra_mkfs_options
> +	if [ $mkfs_status -ne 0 -a -n "$extra_mkfs_options" ]; then
> +		(
> +		echo -n "** mkfs failed with extra mkfs options "
> +		echo "added to \"$MKFS_OPTIONS\" by test $seq **"
> +		echo -n "** attempting to mkfs using only test $seq "
> +		echo "options: $extra_mkfs_options **"
> +		) >> $seqres.full
> +
> +		# running mkfs again. overwrite previous mkfs output files
> +		eval "$mkfs_cmd $extra_mkfs_options $SCRATCH_DEV" \
> +			2>$tmp.mkfserr 1>$tmp.mkfsstd
> +		mkfs_status=$?
> +	fi
> +
> +	# output stored mkfs output, filtering unnecessary output from stderr
> +	cat $tmp.mkfsstd
> +	cat $tmp.mkfserr | $mkfs_filter >&2

Perhaps you could make this a function? Because then it can probably
be used in _scratch_mkfs_ext4 and _scratch_mkfs_xfs as well?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-24 20:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-24 16:06 [PATCH] common/rc: teach _scratch_mkfs to handle mkfs option conflicts Eryu Guan
2016-11-24 20:00 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-11-25 11:28   ` Eryu Guan

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=20161124200013.GT31101@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=eguan@redhat.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