From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FBF32528EB; Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:58:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745855923; cv=none; b=Hg0vUTURgBmkvF4Pf7VmVfIRic0AHyRwxAgJruntrZ5kYmF7nw/vkKvfoJjKgW+78gxXAvr1uWafd49HlkvvsQEIVE8Y8lej1ewIHrfA250NKay9b9BNXUyjyDfBnqYi265a+9Q3gAWAyUUh5tKveWaFS5gpVq9lTKBA4q1q4xQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745855923; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XfaW1XIB46Rmz8mNYMd28IIelp5Xrplwugru0kMZdhU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BOSY9yz0gwY7kMs/Rv9W8psuDeynwBeS9V2mW6/6qLexC7oXZUgxAEZk3MBTpifxhNxjEvRNs7EPwWb2kom3/YcjCa2s9Lzg2HMZ7lm4GcOrMBslgZy03bBAnbVGsihPjS13TpLr1l3UYOGcCZNMu4gKAwYUE2W6dSrmEahW4go= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hTrWuvQN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hTrWuvQN" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC263C4CEE4; Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:58:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1745855922; bh=XfaW1XIB46Rmz8mNYMd28IIelp5Xrplwugru0kMZdhU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hTrWuvQNVcCfjP22SZ6Km1w53TfkxkihkMVfPBGsFe63FT/c68GUbHHmBSI8B8b77 iSy2iBMhOQDSnDXz0XwanazgH5Tp0iql7H2HZ/jL+M2sntXL0aqaZ/QiAxt3iEuIpY mwdicHPVmV2qSlqNhvspXpWgKZOeRTc0JKqwAabJw/P/3huBO6oz0p2O6ogGQ40/IP 8TQjNG1E9dm/olccwOinddrGt7BzmnhAkp+wf6G5VSYYv60sJ+hwaieHao9qAwwcuT ROQuoQO1hOgW7s482O4C+U6e+6ip8hCdimrYJYHEicikV2Gq2wYQamkCFU1mIMt9gl usZKG9SE7glLQ== Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:58:42 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Hans Holmberg Cc: "fstests@vger.kernel.org" , "zlang@kernel.org" , "linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org" , Carlos Maiolino , "david@fromorbit.com" , hch Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xfs: add mount test for read only log devices Message-ID: <20250428155842.GR25675@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20250425090259.10154-1-hans.holmberg@wdc.com> <20250425090259.10154-3-hans.holmberg@wdc.com> <20250425150504.GH25667@frogsfrogsfrogs> <1c313919-f6ca-4f53-be69-21fe93e97b0e@wdc.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c313919-f6ca-4f53-be69-21fe93e97b0e@wdc.com> On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 12:16:34PM +0000, Hans Holmberg wrote: > On 25/04/2025 17:05, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > ps this test should check > > that a readonly log device results in a norecovery mount and that > > pending changes don't show up if the mount succeeds? > > > > Also, ext4 supports external log devices, should this be in > > tests/generic? > > Doh!, actually ext4 has a test for this already, ext4/002 > (also based on generic/050) > > With my fix, ext4/002 passes for xfs Should/can we turn that into a > generic test? Yeah, it looks like ext4/002 already does most of what you want. Though I'd amend it to check that SCRATCH_MNT/00-99 aren't visible in the norecovery mounts and only appear after recovery actually runs. > The test makes sure that a filesystem will mount ro,norecovery if > the log device is ro but does not do any real checks if recovery is > prevented (or done once the log device is rw again). > That could be added though. --D