From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH V5 04/10] syscalls/fsopen: New tests
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2020 09:11:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200312081153.GA16928@dell5510> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200311072502.hpj5bycslu6ygk74@vireshk-i7>
Hi Viresh,
> > > + TEST(move_mount(fsmfd, "", AT_FDCWD, MNTPOINT,
> > > + MOVE_MOUNT_F_EMPTY_PATH));
> > > +
> > > + SAFE_CLOSE(fsmfd);
> > > +
> > > + if (TST_RET == -1) {
> > > + tst_res(TFAIL | TERRNO, "move_mount() failed");
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (tst_is_mounted(MNTPOINT))
> > > + tst_res(TPASS, "%s: fsopen() passed", tc->name);
> > > +
> > > + SAFE_UMOUNT(MNTPOINT);
> > I gues sthat the SAFE_UMOUNT() should be inside of the if here and in
> > the rest of the testcases.
> Petr had a similar comment earlier and here is my explanation to it.
> There should always be a unmount() in response to a successful call to
> mount() APIs. What if, because of some other bugs in the kernel or
> testsuite, tst_is_mounted() returns 0? We should still do the
> unmount() part as the mount() API didn't return an error.
But IMHO if device is not mounted we get TBROK due EINVAL in safe_umount().
I'd understand if this was in cleanup function where TBROK turns to TWARN.
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-12 8:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-27 5:14 [LTP] [PATCH V5 00/10] Add new LTP tests related to fsmount family of syscalls Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 01/10] tst_device: Add tst_is_mounted() helper Viresh Kumar
2020-03-06 12:45 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-03-07 12:42 ` Li Wang
2020-03-11 7:31 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-03-11 10:20 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-03-11 10:26 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-03-11 12:45 ` Li Wang
2020-03-11 13:11 ` Li Wang
2020-03-12 11:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-03-12 11:35 ` Petr Vorel
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 02/10] lapi/fsmount.h: Add fsopen_supported_by_kernel() Viresh Kumar
2020-03-06 12:47 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-03-11 7:22 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 03/10] lapi/fsmount.h: Include "lapi/fcntl.h" Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 04/10] syscalls/fsopen: New tests Viresh Kumar
2020-03-06 13:10 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-03-11 7:25 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-03-12 8:11 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2020-03-12 10:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-03-12 10:11 ` Cyril Hrubis
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 05/10] syscalls/fsconfig: " Viresh Kumar
2020-02-28 16:01 ` Petr Vorel
2020-03-02 8:21 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-03-06 13:25 ` Petr Vorel
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 06/10] syscalls/fsmount: Improve fsmount01 test Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 07/10] syscalls/fsmount: Add failure tests Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 08/10] syscalls/move_mount: New tests Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 09/10] syscalls/fspick: " Viresh Kumar
2020-02-27 5:14 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 10/10] syscalls/open_tree: " Viresh Kumar
2020-03-06 13:18 ` [LTP] [PATCH V5 00/10] Add new LTP tests related to fsmount family of syscalls Cyril Hrubis
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=20200312081153.GA16928@dell5510 \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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