From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com>,
fstests@vger.kernel.org, Eric Whitney <enwlinux@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic: add missing $FSX_AVOID to fsx invocations
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2022 12:09:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2lmFoNQ2ByXzCW0@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y2kzxKnYf8CLj49v@mit.edu>
On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 11:35:16AM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 10:02:36AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > I think it doesn't make sense to use $FSX_AVOID in `fsx --replay-ops` cases.
> > Due to generally the operations which a cases would like to replay are exact
> > steps to reproduce to a known bug. If we skip some operations (e.g. -F), it
> > doesn't make sense for this reproducer.
> >
> > The recommended way for this kind of cases is making sure current fs/system
> > support the operations will be run by fsx, especially those features are not
> > common on different fs/system....
> >
> > So it uses below _require_* helpers to make sure these operations are supported,
> > before testing:
> >
> > _require_xfs_io_command "falloc"
> > _require_xfs_io_command "falloc" "-k"
> > _require_xfs_io_command "fzero"
> > _require_xfs_io_command "fcollapse"
> >
> > That's my point, hope I didn't misunderstand what you said :)
>
> No, you didn't understand me. :-)
>
> For context, I have an out of tree patch (see attached), which I had
> tried upstreaming a while back, but it got rejected, so I've continued
> to keep it in my personal tree. The basic idea is sometimes you might
> want to suppress a test even *though* _require_xfs_io_command seems to
> indicate that operation was supported.
>
> This might either be because the test didn't know about ext4
> bigalloc's cluster alignment requirements, or because a particular
> operation might just be *buggy* and being able to run tests as if a
> particular command wasn't supported was useful.
>
> It was rejected because the claim was that you could just exclude by
> group instead (e.g., "punch", "collapse") but I didn't trust that the
> group list would be kept up to date, so I never really agreed with
> that line of reasoning. These days, given that group declaration are
> kept in the test script, it's much less likely to happen, but I've
> kept the patch in my tree because it's occasionally useful.
>
> At this point, it's admittedly pretty rarely needed since ext4's
> collapse and insert range commands are pretty solid modulo tests not
> understanding cluster alignment, but still, it's not much effort for
> me to keep carrying the patch and I don't expect it will ever get
> upstreamed.
If it's collapse/insert range you're specifically worried about, perhaps
its time to implement _get_file_block_size for ext4 so that
_test_congruent_file_oplen can exclude those tests that will get the
alignment wrong?
--D
>
> - Ted
>
> commit c9d25475a94d5e53d7f18d247a17088999522862
> Author: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
> Date: Sat Oct 17 14:39:26 2015 -0400
>
> common: introduce XFS_IO_AVOID env var
>
> Like FSSTRESS_AVOID and FSX_AVOID, XFS_IO_AVOID can be used to avoid
> using various advanced file system features such as "fpunch"
> "fcollapse", "finsert", or "zero". Tests that require an xfs_io
> command which is included in the space-separated list found in the
> XFS_IO_AVOID environment variable will be skipped using _notrun.
>
> Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
>
> diff --git a/README b/README
> index 4c4f22f85..42baff07b 100644
> --- a/README
> +++ b/README
> @@ -245,6 +245,10 @@ Misc:
> this option is supported for all filesystems currently only -overlay is
> expected to run without issues. For other filesystems additional patches
> and fixes to the test suite might be needed.
> + - setenv XFS_IO_AVOID, which may contain a list of space separated
> + xfs_io commands which will be avoided in case you want to exclude
> + tests that require the use of certain file system operations such
> + as "fpunch", "fcollapse", "finsert", or "zero".
>
> ______________________
> USING THE FSQA SUITE
> diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> index eb67e0cdc..d1c07a4d0 100644
> --- a/common/rc
> +++ b/common/rc
> @@ -2485,6 +2485,11 @@ _require_xfs_io_command()
> local opts=""
> local attr_info=""
>
> + if echo "$XFS_IO_AVOID" | grep -wq -- "$command"
> + then
> + _notrun "Avoiding xfs_io $command"
> + fi
> +
> local testfile=$TEST_DIR/$$.xfs_io
> local testio
> case $command in
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-07 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-05 18:29 [PATCH] generic: add missing $FSX_AVOID to fsx invocations Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-06 12:10 ` Zorro Lang
2022-11-06 21:44 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-07 2:02 ` Zorro Lang
2022-11-07 16:35 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-07 20:09 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2022-11-08 2:44 ` Zorro Lang
2022-11-08 15:08 ` Theodore Ts'o
2022-11-08 15:56 ` Zorro Lang
2022-11-08 16:45 ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-11-11 2:25 ` Zorro Lang
2023-02-07 18:26 ` Zorro Lang
2023-07-28 20:30 ` Theodore Ts'o
2023-08-01 8:27 ` Zorro Lang
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=Y2lmFoNQ2ByXzCW0@magnolia \
--to=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=enwlinux@gmail.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=zlang@redhat.com \
/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