From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xfstests - unchecked mount failures
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:46:36 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120312004636.GW5091@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120309132828.GI4334@twin.jikos.cz>
On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 02:28:28PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've encountered a bad situation when a failed mount in test 269 did not stop
> the test and continued to use the mount point and exhausted space on the root
> partition. A quick grep revealed that there are more tests with unchecked
> _scratch_mount calls.
>
> The underlying problem with failed mount was observed when the mount comes in a
> quick sequence after mount,
Sorry, what? Do you mean mount after mkfs?
> I saw it with btrfs, and don't know if it affects
> other filesystems.
If btrfs is failing to mount because it happens too soon after mkfs,
then that's a btrfs bug, not a xfstests problem.
> So, either all callers should check the return value or _scratch_mount
> calls _fail.
Some tests expect _scratch_mount to fail, so you can't change how
_scratch_mount behaves....
> I'd go for the latter as it will make it more resilient
> against unintentional ommision of checking the retval in new tests and
> reviewer does not have keep that in mind.
I think it is fine to assume that you can mount a filesystem that
you just run mkfs on. If you are testing something that you expect
failure, then sure, check the return, but immeidately after mkfs
(that will fail the test if it fails) it is reasonable to assume
that mount will work.
Of course, if you want to add return value checking to all the
current unchecked callers of _scratch_mount then send a patch
for review. ;)
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-12 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-09 13:28 xfstests - unchecked mount failures David Sterba
2012-03-09 17:41 ` Eric Sandeen
2012-03-12 0:46 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
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=20120312004636.GW5091@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.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