From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Eryu Guan <guan@eryu.me>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic: test which tries to exercise AIO/DIO into unwritten space
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2021 18:11:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YEVdqb9kcOV004ZO@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YET+QSgT3e+R/yzO@desktop>
On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 12:24:33AM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> > +trap "rm -f $tmp.*; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
>
> Better to trap a _cleanup function, even we only do "rm -f $tmp.*" in it,
> so it's consistent to other tests, and it's easier to add more cleanups
> in _cleanup() function in the future if needed.
Done. I had based this test on generic/299 and generic/300, and a lot
of your comments are applicable to them as well. I can send a cleanup
patch to fix up those patches as well..
> > +_require_odirect
>
> _require_aio
Hmmm, generic/299 and generic/300 are missing _require_aio, while
doing async I/O. I'm a bit surprised this hasn't caused problems for
other file systems.
> > +
> > +_workout()
>
> There's no need to add the leading "_" to local function, it's reserved
> to common functions.
Done. (Actually, if we're not unmounting $SCRATCH, then we really
don't need a workout local function at all.)
> > + run_check $FIO_PROG $fio_config
>
> run_check is not recommanded and should be deprecated (maybe I should
> send a patch to document it in comment), as it hides failure in
> $seqres.full and exits if command returns non-zero.
>
> Just call $FIO_PROG command directly and check return value if
> necessary.
Thanks for suggesting dropping the run_check. I found a problem in
the fio receipe which was causing a FIO warning that I had been
missing.
BTW, all but one of the generic are still using run_check, and in the
one exception, generic/095, which uses --output=$seqres.full which is
causing us to lose all of the output of the earlier commands which
redirected their outputs to $seqres.full. So there's clearly a
"target rich environment" in terms of test clean up opportunities.
> > +if ! _scratch_unmount; then
> > + echo "failed to umount"
> > + status=1
> > + exit
> > +fi
>
> Is above _scratch_unmount check really needed? The test harness would
> umount $SCRATCH_DEV after test anyway.
Done.
Thanks for the review,
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-07 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-10 20:58 [PATCH] generic: test which tries to exercise AIO/DIO into unwritten space Theodore Ts'o
2021-03-01 17:02 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-03-01 17:14 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-03-01 18:04 ` Theodore Ts'o
[not found] ` <CABnRu57hdKav3Mi8vQYeowZrQtFToMSzK23h4H2DuqGL0Dea2A@mail.gmail.com>
2021-03-02 3:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-03-02 4:25 ` Su Yue
2021-03-03 20:02 ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-03-07 16:24 ` Eryu Guan
2021-03-07 23:11 ` Theodore Ts'o [this message]
2021-03-08 1:22 ` [PATCH -v2] " Theodore Ts'o
2021-03-15 21:10 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=YEVdqb9kcOV004ZO@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=guan@eryu.me \
/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