[PATCH] xfstests: exit non-0 if fs check fails

[PATCH] xfstests: exit non-0 if fs check fails

[Eric Sandeen]

Right now if any of the _check_scratch_fs tests etc fail,
the check script exits but with 0 status.

This change will cause the status to be non-0 so we can detect
the error.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---

(aside - we could make it 2 instead of 1, so that a calling script
could fsck and continue ... thoughts?)

diff --git a/common.rc b/common.rc
index 2103a77..301ae6a 100644
--- a/common.rc
+++ b/common.rc
@@ -959,6 +959,7 @@ _check_generic_filesystem()
         echo "*** mount output ***"                             >>$here/$seq.full
         _mount                                                  >>$here/$seq.full
         echo "*** end mount output"                             >>$here/$seq.full
+        status=1
     elif [ "$type" = "$FSTYP" ]
     then
 	# was mounted ...
@@ -1054,6 +1055,7 @@ _check_xfs_filesystem()
         echo "*** mount output ***"                             >>$here/$seq.full
         _mount                                                  >>$here/$seq.full
         echo "*** end mount output"                             >>$here/$seq.full
+        status=1
     elif [ "$type" = "xfs" ]
     then
 	_mount_or_remount_rw "$extra_mount_options" $device $mountpoint

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: exit non-0 if fs check fails

[Dave Chinner]

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 06:38:23PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Right now if any of the _check_scratch_fs tests etc fail,
> the check script exits but with 0 status.
> 
> This change will cause the status to be non-0 so we can detect
> the error.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>

Wouldn't it be better to do:

-   [ $ok -eq 0 ] && exit 1
+    if [ $ok -eq 0 ]; then
+	status=1
+	exit 1
+    fi

To catch all failures rather than just the fsck failure?

> ---
> 
> (aside - we could make it 2 instead of 1, so that a calling script
> could fsck and continue ... thoughts?)

I think if a test corrupts a filesystem, the test run should stop
so the failure can be analysed without needing to reproduce it
again...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: exit non-0 if fs check fails

[Eric Sandeen]

Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 06:38:23PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Right now if any of the _check_scratch_fs tests etc fail,
>> the check script exits but with 0 status.
>>
>> This change will cause the status to be non-0 so we can detect
>> the error.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to do:
> 
> -   [ $ok -eq 0 ] && exit 1
> +    if [ $ok -eq 0 ]; then
> +	status=1
> +	exit 1
> +    fi
> 
> To catch all failures rather than just the fsck failure?

sure, that sounds better.  I'll check that version in w/ your SOB
unless I hear otherwise :)

Thanks,
-Eric

>> ---
>>
>> (aside - we could make it 2 instead of 1, so that a calling script
>> could fsck and continue ... thoughts?)
> 
> I think if a test corrupts a filesystem, the test run should stop
> so the failure can be analysed without needing to reproduce it
> again...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: exit non-0 if fs check fails

[Alex Elder]

On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 20:25 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 06:38:23PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> Right now if any of the _check_scratch_fs tests etc fail,
> >> the check script exits but with 0 status.
> >>
> >> This change will cause the status to be non-0 so we can detect
> >> the error.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be better to do:
> > 
> > -   [ $ok -eq 0 ] && exit 1
> > +    if [ $ok -eq 0 ]; then
> > +	status=1
> > +	exit 1
> > +    fi
> > 
> > To catch all failures rather than just the fsck failure?

I see this patch is already committed to xfstests-dev.

I don't see the point of setting status=1 before exiting.
If what you meant was to set the status and then *return*
a non-zero value it would make sense.

How do you feel about updating your patch and committing
the result to the -dev tree?

If you change "exit" to "return" in both spots you
can consider it reviewed by me.

					-Alex

PS  Here is a script that shows what's going on.

#!/bin/bash

echo =============
status=1
echo top-level shell PID is $$
echo initial status is $status

bash <<!
        echo -------------
        echo sub-shell PID is \$$
        echo sub-shell initial status is \$status

        foo() { echo foo PID is \$$; status=2; return 3; }
        bar() { echo bar PID is \$$; status=4; exit 5; }
        
        echo -------------
        status=0
        foo             # This is run in the current (sub) shell
        echo foo result is \$?
        echo post-foo status is \$status
        echo current shell PID is \$$

        echo -------------
        status=0
        bar             # This will exit to the top-level shell
        # And the next three will not get executed
        echo bar result is \$?
        echo post-bar status is \$status
        echo current shell PID is \$$
!
R=$?
echo -------------
echo final result is $R
echo final shell PID is $$
echo final status is $status

echo =============

exit 0



> sure, that sounds better.  I'll check that version in w/ your SOB
> unless I hear otherwise :)
> 
> Thanks,
> -Eric
> 
> >> ---
> >>
> >> (aside - we could make it 2 instead of 1, so that a calling script
> >> could fsck and continue ... thoughts?)
> > 
> > I think if a test corrupts a filesystem, the test run should stop
> > so the failure can be analysed without needing to reproduce it
> > again...
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Dave.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs



_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs