From: "Michael L. Semon" <mlsemon35@gmail.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: generic/258 questions (mount issue)...
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 18:58:15 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519D4D87.2070806@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130522012620.GA29466@dastard>
On 05/21/2013 09:26 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 08:43:13PM -0400, Michael L. Semon wrote:
>> Hi! When using xfstests generic/258 with along with $TEST_RTDEV
>> $TEST_LOGDEV, it tends to scream bloody murder about corrupted
>> partitions and such. In fact, the commands in the test seem to do
>> the right thing when executed by hand. So once again, I grasped for
>> straws and came up with this:
>>
>> --- xfstests/tests/generic/258.orig 2013-05-21 20:19:38.430754829 -0400
>> +++ xfstests/tests/generic/258 2013-05-21 20:10:11.509021368 -0400
>> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
>> # unmount, remount, and check the timestamp
>> echo "Remounting to flush cache"
>> umount $TEST_DEV
>> -mount $TEST_DEV $TEST_DIR
>> +_test_mount
>>
>> # Should yield -315593940 (prior to epoch)
>> echo "Testing for negative seconds since epoch"
>>
>> My questions are these:
>>
>> 1) Was there a better way to do this?
>
> No, your change is correct. Can you clean up the description of the
> problem you had and add a Signed-off-by?
>
>> 2) Not knowing the policy on umounting $TEST_DEV, could this have
>> been a test for $SCRATCH_DEV?
>
> There are a handful of other tests that also unmount the TEST_DEV.
> Perhaps adding a _test_umount() wrapper to common/rc (similar to
> _scratch_umount) would be best. At least shared/243 needs the same
> _test_mount treatment as this test.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
>
I have a simple _test_mount change in shared/243, tested and ready to
post. However, it may work the same either way. AFAIK, the test seems
to go like this:
xfs_io this;
if ( ext4 )
{
umount;
do some unmounted ext4 stuff;
mount -t ${FSTYP} ...;
}
xfs_io that;
if ( ext4 )
{
...
}
...
So if it isn't ext4 being tested, $TEST_DEV is not umounted at all.
Until I got a closer look at this, it was a surprise to see the
XFS+rtdev+logdev pass without changes.
The rest of your comments will be followed when I get home. To use the
external logdev means a 20%-30% improvement in some test results on XFS.
To get the other file systems to do this will certainly have me looking
at the $TEST_DEV mount and umount code anyway.
Thanks!
Michael
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-22 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-22 0:43 generic/258 questions (mount issue) Michael L. Semon
2013-05-22 1:26 ` Dave Chinner
2013-05-22 3:03 ` Michael L. Semon
2013-05-22 14:10 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-05-22 16:15 ` Michael L. Semon
2013-05-22 16:19 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-05-22 16:48 ` Michael L. Semon
2013-05-22 17:08 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-05-22 19:01 ` Rich Johnston
2013-05-22 22:58 ` Michael L. Semon [this message]
2013-05-23 2:27 ` [PATCH] xfstests: Change mount method for shared/243 Michael L. Semon
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=519D4D87.2070806@gmail.com \
--to=mlsemon35@gmail.com \
--cc=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