[LTP] [PATCH v7 3/3] syscalls/copy_file_range02: increase coverage and remove EXDEV test

Yang Xu
2019-08-08T03:11:43Z

on 2019/08/07 18:17, Murphy Zhou wrote:

> And I have a question about LTP itself.
>
> If we run the testcase directly like:
> ./testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02
>
> to test all_filesystems, for every filesystem, we mkfs and mount it in
> .mntpoint, but we do not chdir to .mntpoint. So we are running tests in
> the same tmpdir, fs type of which does not change while looping
> all_filesystems. Only the .mntpoint in tmpdir has different fs type in
> each loop.
>
> Now we are using this to test cross-device copy in copy_file_range01.c,
> but in copy_file_range02.c, we are not using .mntpint at all, all the
> tests in the all_filesystems loop are running in the same tmpdir. In other
> words, we are NOT testing all filesystems.
>
> Is this expected?
I removed the mnted test for cross-device copy_file_range in copy_file_range02.c.
And I ignore the non-used mntpoint. IMO, we can directly use the FILE_MNTED to test EFBIG on all filesystems,

as below:
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c
index 26bfa008a..67974ffa2 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c
+++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/copy_file_range/copy_file_range02.c
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ static int fd_blkdev;
static int fd_chrdev;
static int fd_fifo;
static int fd_copy;
+static int fd_mnted;

static int chattr_i_nsup;
static int swap_nsup;

@@ -73,7 +74,7 @@ static struct tcase {
{&fd_chrdev, 0, EINVAL, 0, CONTSIZE},
{&fd_fifo, 0, EINVAL, 0, CONTSIZE},
{&fd_copy, 0, EOVERFLOW, MAX_OFF, ULLONG_MAX},
- {&fd_copy, 0, EFBIG, MAX_OFF, MIN_OFF},
+ {&fd_mnted, 0, EFBIG, MAX_OFF, MIN_OFF},
};

static int run_command(char *command, char *option, char *file)
@@ -117,7 +118,10 @@ static void verify_copy_file_range(unsigned int n)
tst_res(TPASS | TTERRNO,
"copy_file_range failed as expected");
} else {
- tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO,
+ if (tc->exp_err == EFBIG && TST_ERR == EXDEV)
+ tst_res(TCONF, "copy_file_range doesn't support cross-device,skip it");
+ else
+ tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO,
"copy_file_range failed unexpectedly; expected %s, but got",
tst_strerrno(tc->exp_err));
return;

@@ -152,6 +156,8 @@ static void cleanup(void)
SAFE_CLOSE(fd_dup);
if (fd_copy > 0)
SAFE_CLOSE(fd_copy);
+ if (fd_mnted > 0)
+ SAFE_CLOSE(fd_mnted);
SAFE_UNLINK(FILE_FIFO);
}

@@ -194,6 +200,7 @@ static void setup(void)

fd_copy = SAFE_OPEN(FILE_COPY_PATH, O_RDWR | O_CREAT | O_TRUNC, 0664);
chattr_i_nsup = run_command("chattr", "+i", FILE_IMMUTABLE_PATH);
+ fd_mnted = SAFE_OPEN(FILE_MNTED_PATH, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0664);

if (!tst_fs_has_free(".", sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE) * 10, TST_BYTES)) {
tst_res(TCONF, "Insufficient disk space to create swap file");
swap_nsup = 3;

test12) succeed on extN, failed on both btrfs and xfs, we need to detect filesystem type to handle. Or, I think we
can set a limit on filesize because this kind of user scene is a bit more than the first one , the EFBIG error can be
received easily (Also, we don't need mnt_device mntpoint all_filesystem if so).
What do you think about it?

> I commented out testcases in copy_file_range02.c other then #12, and add
> some nasty debug info: