Re: [PATCH v4] btrfs/011: use $_btrfs_profile_configs to limit the tests

[Long An <lan@suse.com>]

On Fri, 2023-01-20 at 12:49 +0100, David Disseldorp wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 11:19:09 +0800, An Long wrote:
> 
> > Generally the tester need BTRFS_PROFILE_CONFIGS to test certain
> > profiles. For example, skip raid56 as it's not supported.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: An Long <lan@suse.com>
> > ---
> >  tests/btrfs/011 | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
> >  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tests/btrfs/011 b/tests/btrfs/011
> > index 6c3d037f..ac45e735 100755
> > --- a/tests/btrfs/011
> > +++ b/tests/btrfs/011
> > @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ _require_scratch_dev_pool 5
> >  _require_scratch_dev_pool_equal_size
> >  _require_scratch_size $((10 * 1024 * 1024)) #kB
> >  _require_command "$WIPEFS_PROG" wipefs
> > +_btrfs_get_profile_configs
> >  
> >  rm -f $tmp.*
> >  
> > @@ -237,18 +238,27 @@ btrfs_replace_test()
> >         fi
> >  }
> >  
> > -workout "-m single -d single" 1 no 64
> > +if [[ "${_btrfs_profile_configs[@]}" =~ "-m single -d single"( |$)
> > ]]; then
> > +       workout "-m single -d single" 1 no 64
> > +fi
> > +
> >  # Mixed BG & RAID/DUP profiles are not supported on zoned btrfs
> >  if ! _scratch_btrfs_is_zoned; then
> > -       workout "-m dup -d single" 1 no 64
> > -       workout "-m dup -d single" 1 cancel 1024
> > -       workout "-m raid0 -d raid0" 2 no 64
> > -       workout "-m raid1 -d raid1" 2 no 2048
> > -       workout "-m raid10 -d raid10" 4 no 64
> > -       workout "-m single -d single -M" 1 no 64
> > -       workout "-m dup -d dup -M" 1 no 64
> > -       workout "-m raid5 -d raid5" 2 no 64
> > -       workout "-m raid6 -d raid6" 3 no 64
> > +       for t in "-m dup -d single:1 no 64" \
> > +               "-m dup -d single:1 cancel 1024" \
> > +               "-m raid0 -d raid0:2 no 64" \
> > +               "-m raid1 -d raid1:2 no 2048" \
> > +               "-m raid10 -d raid10:4 no 64" \
> > +               "-m single -d single -M:1 no 64" \
> > +               "-m dup -d dup -M:1 no 64" \
> 
> This dup/dup case no longer gets run with a default
> _btrfs_profile_configs[]. Is that intentional?
> 
> Cheers, David

I thought profiles from "BTRFS_PROFILE_CONFIGS" should be fine. But
this really changed behavior with default configs, and will get worse
if use "_btrfs_profile_configs replace".

In a brief, I just need a way to limit tests. If the default
config is not 
suitable, how about using a new argument to
"_btrfs_get_profile_configs"?

Thanks,
An Long