From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f181.google.com (mail-pl1-f181.google.com [209.85.214.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FB9B1FBC87; Fri, 21 Feb 2025 05:49:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.181 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740116988; cv=none; b=GPEMMu3n6iUQJylsiBSNq5zWR1270uhspvS8NQo83349Ims/Ov6rVQcqYo6eI0RufNIkfWR8+Buj9Z0KuCkqJXXnJqYsCt9Jg5CM3Ply+ogeXWUV2IBZ0dWpcpKHQHqqpCUmOl6TBl+TQPkVcrm3+WjUD+IKJ0bSu5xfY2myvNI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1740116988; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cvmiWKew6bIhrYPHLGmG7TpPGmgPt9q+TqAyBCJNGBg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Yme7b3+HDWH5Ynj4bD725qNkkDWokMu0ICZf0P4w9OSPZDA8fu86oth9h1a+iFPEPaYKJTUEXCY94dCeNqHmbBXXQVOvTa4tX7df1p63LuKUn2TefKSh7kJRjVD71WS3NSyKTVEy2srs8GcIiuZ8GGonEbZfql4fc3ceq4SGo3E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Lt+8ACfI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.181 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Lt+8ACfI" Received: by mail-pl1-f181.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-220bfdfb3f4so37778475ad.2; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 21:49:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1740116986; x=1740721786; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YxH9KuWJX9rm9WyAdNNgaHpu9/9ip+kAMwhprP7JICU=; b=Lt+8ACfIb2YLXKc1dhR3h9wjwbJIinbqNvR5N5FM5ua4Vu2Cse0x9F3MsaWzxJmU4I ZTjeOoxDDjQq7adiBl44VqfbW/UkSR4v+4prTtem7zOE3ART/fy8v7aoEsYhM4R9hGue Tz4DKXndA2RzdA2XA25naruzld2s3B9uHtwkagGpf5NshyoUHp8BInBL8FTJdZIZnOhD Biz+GIeLNXe7CUu+6ozC9qbUvevlWrUnBo/k/PDc9ONShJqDQDGfWP4RywLV0WPtOwbU sHV6g/9PQoeq68gmlEaTVvpCj0pbtQisOtaNPPWLITbsZpFnq+UtR8NoJ4Nb9dSpJLI9 C7GQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1740116986; x=1740721786; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YxH9KuWJX9rm9WyAdNNgaHpu9/9ip+kAMwhprP7JICU=; b=ZKto6mqI5qrMx4Q5BuDzyrf8ov7vlldUvPwY54GEZz5YKZew/A5hDqLAgnDaw6AxRt Eieb/nw774kHfrCW7vodC0NXjVPMrL7pBEBsIsQk+x2iOFOag6kAPPiozmYu3cqrZ3UH bkKdWweNUZxWEHA9TuMCCxZIbiV9MGgruVILhPUCPHzNSYn5EeYPFCt45pWCyVVRVcca HkAkjy+YxS/EjfhbF4OQG1erxBM6ivSnU+MLGbLXuBOZ+VtONQ3hsrC6QxbGWMEQD9fO t6JEIpkKtJl6ClxRkaO0rYxKa1Z2uS5dfIXkdADob/DO5L4ggV6nv03PKwzm1zA7HUQ6 MH2Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWg7ICWsirX++daTZiHCRecvPPQh4fGfdkfBq0IDsM6cbWKBg9CWo4io0w1E0bK13gTkgA5gXED@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCWj9eaYT9KOzOooKQxNUHrCMq2sDEqVzvx3qWtdZCyVet7IHd8nyrFRVX6wcKATne+1VAwT/6WANdkp@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCXqfmIRkzmF6RIxquByl0lH+6XHqCKy9vr2VFG0hpKTL8VJ34JwPd8DqN6CCpgyNFB06rMGXTiQjA8sBA==@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyCgyXrPVKfAB6iTbEBDcwqCzC80MdjVo7YU4EBCV4xDfIPHOMl Clxd7IpJOlg3GaFD180Cjz0nJQOEaF+iyOUuwSAuIOl2Mz8GBesC X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsBJ9s6uaa4e4dAx7Tn7v497lo2fZ2y6d2kcqfkawgLju7/QrwaFNBiQT3372h FuuPfPMLjyFp/dZu4OID9eBwLE97yojEDU4qKL+hij+4aCM5XBeMwFHwcpfRFbkM6MfkyADqffO AUkJeNzAhSw4EQytciLMccS29oerMuFjbtC//+w6XpFEvu9ExLojMXvhIvsea4Xab3jlcBFjFrx D98/GHBOW7M0eH2JmbrE3QLDsHGJXyBmFAUZf9XmIDV6/WKyAgZxEHAMmKr4HwKW9E1wWPqXN9b 6E31/uoATWNXwTbtGLxGNO+RAzI1Q9kXHMcz X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEiidR4fTSv8C0AJDrbT+K+y1GcOQ2r1xj4NzKnkKaamPGXo0BUpCJHMFOCn1ftjslEXhVOIg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f68e:b0:21f:6bda:e492 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2219ffc3d85mr33712205ad.35.1740116986228; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 21:49:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.120] ([49.205.33.247]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-220d55858d6sm129371975ad.223.2025.02.20.21.49.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Feb 2025 21:49:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 11:19:41 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] check: Fix fs specfic imports when $FSTYPE!=$OLD_FSTYPE Content-Language: en-US To: Zorro Lang Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, ritesh.list@gmail.com, ojaswin@linux.ibm.com, zlang@kernel.org References: <3b980d028a8ae1496c13ebe3a6685fbc472c5bc0.1738040386.git.nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com> <20250128180917.GA3561257@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20250129160259.GT3557553@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20250131162457.GV1611770@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20250201063516.gndb7lngpd5afatv@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> <20250210142322.tptpphdntglsz4eq@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> <20250221054737.owarnxetb34gdicf@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> From: "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" In-Reply-To: <20250221054737.owarnxetb34gdicf@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2/21/25 11:17, Zorro Lang wrote: > On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 09:44:19AM +0530, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote: >> On 2/10/25 19:53, Zorro Lang wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 11:32:43PM +0530, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote: >>>> On 2/1/25 12:05, Zorro Lang wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 08:24:57AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 06:49:50PM +0530, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote: >>>>>>> On 1/29/25 21:32, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>>>>>>> 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/$FSTYP has not yet >>>>>>>>>>> been done. Hence _xfs_prepare_for_eio_shutdown() is not found and >>>>>>>>>>> the test run fails. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Fix: >>>>>>>>>>> Remove the additional _test_mount in check file just before ". commom/rc" >>>>>>>>>>> since ". commom/rc" is already sourcing fs specific imports and doing a >>>>>>>>>>> _test_mount. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 1a49022fab9b4 ("fstests: always use fail-at-unmount semantics for XFS") >>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy (IBM) >>>>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>>>> check | 12 +++--------- >>>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/check b/check >>>>>>>>>>> index 607d2456..5cb4e7eb 100755 >>>>>>>>>>> --- a/check >>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/check >>>>>>>>>>> @@ -784,15 +784,9 @@ function run_section() >>>>>>>>>>> status=1 >>>>>>>>>>> exit >>>>>>>>>>> fi >>>>>>>>>>> - if ! _test_mount >>>>>>>>>> Don't we want to _test_mount the newly created filesystem still? But >>>>>>>>>> perhaps after sourcing common/rc ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> --D >>>>>>>>> common/rc calls init_rc() in the end and init_rc() already does a >>>>>>>>> _test_mount. _test_mount after sourcing common/rc will fail, won't it? Does >>>>>>>>> that make sense? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> init_rc() >>>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>>>     # make some further configuration checks here >>>>>>>>>     if [ "$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 ? >>>>>>> Yes, it should. init_rc() is getting called twice when common/rc is getting >>>>>>> re-sourced. Maybe I can do like >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> if $RECREATE_TEST_DEV || [ "$OLD_FSTYP" != "$FSTYP" ]; then >>>>>>> >>>>>>>     <...> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>     . common/rc # changes in this patch >>>>>>> >>>>>>>     <...> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> elif [ "$OLD_TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS" != "$TEST_FS_MOUNT_OPTS" ]; then >>>>>>> >>>>>>>     ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>     init_rc() # explicitly adding an init_rc() for this condition >>>>>>> >>>>>>> else >>>>>>> >>>>>>>     init_rc() # # explicitly adding an init_rc() for all other conditions. >>>>>>> This will prevent init_rc() from getting called twice during re-sourcing >>>>>>> common/rc >>>>>>> >>>>>>> fi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>> Sounds fine as a mechanical change, but I wonder, should calling init_rc >>>>>> be explicit? There are not so many places that source common/rc: >>>>>> >>>>>> $ git grep 'common/rc' >>>>>> check:362:if ! . ./common/rc; then >>>>>> check:836: . common/rc >>>>>> common/preamble:52: . ./common/rc >>>>>> soak:7:. ./common/rc >>>>>> tests/generic/749:18:. ./common/rc >>>>>> >>>>>> (I filtered out the non-executable matches) >>>>>> >>>>>> I think the call in generic/749 is unnecessary and I don't know what >>>>>> soak does. But that means that one could insert an explicit call to >>>>>> init_rc at line 366 and 837 in check and at line 53 in common/preamble, >>>>>> and we can clean up one more of those places where sourcing a common/ >>>>>> file actually /does/ something quietly under the covers. >>>>>> >>>>>> (Unless the maintainer is ok with the status quo...?) >>>>> I think people just hope to import the helpers in common/rc mostly, don't >>>>> want to run init_rc again. Maybe we can make sure the init_rc is only run >>>>> once each time? >>>>> >>>>> E.g. >>>>> >>>>> if [ _INIT_RC != "done" ];then >>>>> init_rc >>>>> _INIT_RC="done" >>>>> fi >>>>> >>>>> Or any better idea. >>>> Yes, this idea looks good too. However, after thinking a bit more, I like >>>> Darrick's idea to remove the call to init_rc from common/rc and explicitly >>>> calling them explicitly whenever necessary makes more sense. This also makes >>>> the interface/reason to source common/rc more meaningful, and also not >>>> making common/rc do something via init_rc silently. What do you think? >>> Sorry I'm on a travel, reply you late. I don't like to run codes in include >>> files either :) If we remove the init_rc calling from common/rc we might >>> need to do 2 things: >>> 1) xfstests/check needs to run init_rc, calls it in check properly. >>> 2) Now each sub-cases run init_rc when they import common/rc, I think >>> we can call init_rc in common/preamble:_begin_fstest(). >> Sorry for my delayed reply, I got caught up with some other work items. >> Thank you for your above suggestions. Let me go through them, look for some >> edge cases and I can come up with a patch after some proper testing. > No problem :) I just suggested, but the thing is we must figure out which > ". common/rc" hopes to run init_rc, and which not :) Thanks for looking > into it and test it. Yes, I will look into this. Thank you. --NR > >> Regards, >> >> --NR >> >>> If I miss other things, please feel free to remind me:) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Zorro >>> >>>> --NR >>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Zorro >>>>> >>>>>> --D >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: "Darrick J. Wong" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --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 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Nirjhar Roy >>>>>>> Linux Kernel Developer >>>>>>> IBM, Bangalore >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Nirjhar Roy >>>> Linux Kernel Developer >>>> IBM, Bangalore >>>> >> -- >> Nirjhar Roy >> Linux Kernel Developer >> IBM, Bangalore >> -- Nirjhar Roy Linux Kernel Developer IBM, Bangalore