From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not check ocfs2 Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 16:57:55 -0600 Message-ID: <5133D573.3050106@sandeen.net> References: <1362269150-21478-1-git-send-email-richard@nod.at> <20130303011917.GI23616@dastard> <20130303100254.500b076f@spider.haslach.nod.at> <5133C900.9050300@sandeen.net> <20130303231905.0efd6d08@spider.haslach.nod.at> <5133D15A.9010600@sandeen.net> <20130303235341.7470085e@spider.haslach.nod.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dave Chinner , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com To: Richard Weinberger Return-path: Received: from sandeen.net ([63.231.237.45]:33806 "EHLO sandeen.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753109Ab3CCW5x (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Mar 2013 17:57:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20130303235341.7470085e@spider.haslach.nod.at> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/3/13 4:53 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Anyway, what if you did something more along the lines of [pseudocode] >> >> ocfs2) >> if mounted.ocfs2 -f $TEST-DEV | frob_as_necessary[1] >> ; >> else >> fsck.ocfs2 $TEST-DEV >> fi >> ;; >> >> so that *if* it's mounted on some other node, the fsck won't run. >> That has downsides as Dave mentioned, but for the case where the >> xfstests node is the only one with it in use, it'll still do the >> beneficial consistency check. >> >> Just tweaking the fsck action bsed on *if* it's mounted (or, >> maybe, if the node is in a cluster?) might be a more generic solution >> that is widely applicable to all ocfs2 test environments. > > Good point. mounted.ocfs2 really makes sense. I'll implement this on my > test suite and submit a new patch. Sounds good to me. It'd be most preferable to do a cluster-wide unmount and fsck, but if that's unfeasible, then skipping the fsck (with a warning) is still preferable to simply disabling it outright for everyone. Thanks, -Eric