Re: [PATCH v2] check: Fix fs specfic imports when $FSTYPE!=$OLD_FSTYPE

["Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 04:48:10PM +0530, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote:
> 
> On 1/28/25 23:39, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 05:00:22AM +0000, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote:
> > > Bug Description:
> > > 
> > > _test_mount function is failing with the following error:
> > > ./common/rc: line 4716: _xfs_prepare_for_eio_shutdown: command not found
> > > check: failed to mount /dev/loop0 on /mnt1/test
> > > 
> > > when the second section in local.config file is xfs and the first section
> > > is non-xfs.
> > > 
> > > It can be easily reproduced with the following local.config file
> > > 
> > > [s2]
> > > export FSTYP=ext4
> > > export TEST_DEV=/dev/loop0
> > > export TEST_DIR=/mnt1/test
> > > export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/loop1
> > > export SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt1/scratch
> > > 
> > > [s1]
> > > export FSTYP=xfs
> > > export TEST_DEV=/dev/loop0
> > > export TEST_DIR=/mnt1/test
> > > export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/loop1
> > > export SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt1/scratch
> > > 
> > > ./check selftest/001
> > > 
> > > Root cause:
> > > When _test_mount() is executed for the second section, the FSTYPE has
> > > already changed but the new fs specific common/$FSTYP has not yet
> > > been done. Hence _xfs_prepare_for_eio_shutdown() is not found and
> > > the test run fails.
> > > 
> > > Fix:
> > > Remove the additional _test_mount in check file just before ". commom/rc"
> > > since ". commom/rc" is already sourcing fs specific imports and doing a
> > > _test_mount.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 1a49022fab9b4 ("fstests: always use fail-at-unmount semantics for XFS")
> > > Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy (IBM) <nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > >   check | 12 +++---------
> > >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/check b/check
> > > index 607d2456..5cb4e7eb 100755
> > > --- a/check
> > > +++ b/check
> > > @@ -784,15 +784,9 @@ function run_section()
> > >   			status=1
> > >   			exit
> > >   		fi
> > > -		if ! _test_mount
> > Don't we want to _test_mount the newly created filesystem still?  But
> > perhaps after sourcing common/rc ?
> > 
> > --D
> 
> common/rc calls init_rc() in the end and init_rc() already does a
> _test_mount. _test_mount after sourcing common/rc will fail, won't it? Does
> that make sense?
> 
> init_rc()
> {
>     # make some further configuration checks here
>     if [ "$TEST_DEV" = ""  ]
>     then
>         echo "common/rc: Error: \$TEST_DEV is not set"
>         exit 1
>     fi
> 
>     # if $TEST_DEV is not mounted, mount it now as XFS
>     if [ -z "`_fs_type $TEST_DEV`" ]
>     then
>         # $TEST_DEV is not mounted
>         if ! _test_mount
>         then
>             echo "common/rc: retrying test device mount with external set"
>             [ "$USE_EXTERNAL" != "yes" ] && export USE_EXTERNAL=yes
>             if ! _test_mount
>             then
>                 echo "common/rc: could not mount $TEST_DEV on $TEST_DIR"
>                 exit 1
>             fi
>         fi
>     fi
> ...

ahahahaha yes it does.

/commit message reading comprehension fail, sorry about that.

Though now that you point it out, should check elide the init_rc call
about 12 lines down if it re-sourced common/rc ?

Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>

--D

> ...
> 
> --NR
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> > > -		then
> > > -			echo "check: failed to mount $TEST_DEV on $TEST_DIR"
> > > -			status=1
> > > -			exit
> > > -		fi
> > > -		# TEST_DEV has been recreated, previous FSTYP derived from
> > > -		# TEST_DEV could be changed, source common/rc again with
> > > -		# correct FSTYP to get FSTYP specific configs, e.g. common/xfs
> > > +		# Previous FSTYP derived from TEST_DEV could be changed, source
> > > +		# common/rc again with correct FSTYP to get FSTYP specific configs,
> > > +		# e.g. common/xfs
> > >   		. common/rc
> > >   		_prepare_test_list
> > >   	elif [ "$OLD_TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS" != "$TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS" ]; then
> > > -- 
> > > 2.34.1
> > > 
> > > 
> -- 
> Nirjhar Roy
> Linux Kernel Developer
> IBM, Bangalore
>