Re: [PATCH V3] overlay: Test consistent st_ino numbers for non-samefs scenario

[Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>]

On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:33:34PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Chandan Rajendra
> <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > This commit adds a test to verify consistent st_ino feature when
> > the overlayfs instance is composed of two different underlying
> > filesystem instances.
> >
> > For example,
> > $ mount -t xfs /dev/loop0 /mnt/test
> > $ mount -t xfs /dev/loop1 /mnt/scratch
> > $ mkdir /mnt/scratch/upper
> > $ mkdir /mnt/scratch/work
> > $ mount -t overlay overlay -o lowerdir=/mnt/test \
> >         -o upperdir=/mnt/scratch/upper \
> >         -o workdir=/mnt/scratch/work /mnt/merge
> >
> > The goal of this test is to verify that overlayfs returns consistent
> > st_ino for the following scenarios,
> > - Copy-up of lowerdir files
> > - Rename files and drop dentry/inode cache
> > - Remount the overlayfs instance
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> Looks good.
> 
> I reviewed and verified that all test you modified and added work as expected
> with index=on/off (does not change result) and with/without 32bit inode/xino
> (new tests fail on 64 ino and pass with 32bit ino or -o xino)
> 
> For Eryu, it would have been more clear if you posted this test in
> the same series as 017,018,044 and re-post the "t_dir_type strtoul" change

I've taken the "t_dir_type strtoul" patch and am about to push new
patches to upstream for this week's update.

> on the same series, just to highlight that they are all related and dependencies
> between them. Nevermind now, but in case you need to re-post.

Thanks for all the review!

Eryu