From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A070C29E1D for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:26:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A2168F8035 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 09:26:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkim1.fusionio.com (dkim1.fusionio.com [66.114.96.53]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id xSp5KBBhgThLxKsu (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 09:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.fusionio.com (unknown [10.101.1.160]) by dkim1.fusionio.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F015E7C069D for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:26:01 -0600 (MDT) Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:25:58 -0400 From: Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: exit out if _scratch_mount fails Message-ID: <20130726162558.GB24583@localhost.localdomain> References: <1373396847-7975-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fusionio.com> <20130726161235.GK3111@sgi.com> <51F2A091.3010407@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51F2A091.3010407@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: linxu-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Ben Myers , Josef Bacik , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:15:13AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 7/26/13 11:12 AM, Ben Myers wrote: > > Hey Josef, > > > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 03:07:27PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > >> I test some of the different mkfs options for btrfs, one set doesn't work > >> properly with small file systems, so the fs won't mount. This is fine from a > >> btrfs point of view, but tests that fail to mount the scratch fs will run > >> anyway, so if it's a "fill the fs" sort of test this will wreak havoc. To fix > >> this just error out of _scratch_mount fails. Thanks, > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik > > > > I noticed that this change causes dmapi tests to try to be run on systems that > > don't have dmapi supported, and they fail. Have you seen this? > > > > Thanks, > > Ben > > I haven't tested either way, but does: > > _mount -t $FSTYP `_scratch_mount_options $*` || _fail "Scratch mount failed" > > work any better? Well thats cleaner but I'm not sure why this patch is making that happen. I don't have dmapi on my main box (at least afaik) and I've not had that sort of issue running with this patch. Thanks, Josef _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs