From: "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" <nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com>
To: Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com>, "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: 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
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] check: Fix fs specfic imports when $FSTYPE!=$OLD_FSTYPE
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 23:32:43 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ff6b4e2f-dbd3-479b-a522-a1ae4837b3df@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250201063516.gndb7lngpd5afatv@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com>
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/$FSTYP has not yet
>>>>>>> been done. Hence _xfs_prepare_for_eio_shutdown() is not found and
>>>>>>> the test run fails.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fix:
>>>>>>> Remove the additional _test_mount in check file just before ". commom/rc"
>>>>>>> since ". commom/rc" is already sourcing fs specific imports and doing a
>>>>>>> _test_mount.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fixes: 1a49022fab9b4 ("fstests: always use fail-at-unmount semantics for XFS")
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy (IBM) <nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> check | 12 +++---------
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/check b/check
>>>>>>> index 607d2456..5cb4e7eb 100755
>>>>>>> --- a/check
>>>>>>> +++ b/check
>>>>>>> @@ -784,15 +784,9 @@ function run_section()
>>>>>>> status=1
>>>>>>> exit
>>>>>>> fi
>>>>>>> - if ! _test_mount
>>>>>> Don't we want to _test_mount the newly created filesystem still? But
>>>>>> perhaps after sourcing common/rc ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --D
>>>>> common/rc calls init_rc() in the end and init_rc() already does a
>>>>> _test_mount. _test_mount after sourcing common/rc will fail, won't it? Does
>>>>> that make sense?
>>>>>
>>>>> init_rc()
>>>>> {
>>>>> # make some further configuration checks here
>>>>> if [ "$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 ?
>>> 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?
--NR
>
> Thanks,
> Zorro
>
>> --D
>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>> --
>>> Nirjhar Roy
>>> Linux Kernel Developer
>>> IBM, Bangalore
>>>
>>>
--
Nirjhar Roy
Linux Kernel Developer
IBM, Bangalore
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-06 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-28 5:00 [PATCH v2] check: Fix fs specfic imports when $FSTYPE!=$OLD_FSTYPE Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-28 18:09 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-29 11:18 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-29 16:02 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-01-31 13:19 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-01-31 16:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-01 6:35 ` Zorro Lang
2025-02-06 18:02 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM) [this message]
2025-02-10 14:23 ` Zorro Lang
2025-02-21 4:14 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-02-21 5:47 ` Zorro Lang
2025-02-21 5:49 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-02-06 5:35 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-02-06 15:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-02-06 17:58 ` Nirjhar Roy (IBM)
2025-02-01 7:05 ` Zorro Lang
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=ff6b4e2f-dbd3-479b-a522-a1ae4837b3df@gmail.com \
--to=nirjhar.roy.lists@gmail.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=zlang@kernel.org \
--cc=zlang@redhat.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