xfstests: Assume yes when test device is not partitioned
PATCH 1/1 xfstests: Assume yes when test device is not partitioned
If an entire device used for file system creation, the mkfs.ext2/3/4 asks for confirmation before proceeding. Since the device is configured for testing it is safe to assume positive response during mkfs.
The patch also replaces hard coded mkfs path with MKFS_PROG variable.
--- 032 | 4 ++-- 049 | 2 +- 073 | 2 +- common.rc | 4 ++-- 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
032 +2 -2
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ _require_nobigloopfs _require_scratch echo "Silence is golden." -for fs in `echo /sbin/mkfs.* | sed -e 's/.sbin.mkfs.//g'` +for fs in `echo ${MKFS_PROG}.* | sed -e 's/.sbin.mkfs.//g'` do preop="" # for special input needs preargs="" # for any special pre-device options
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ do if [ $? -eq 0 ] ; then # next, ensure we don't overwrite it echo "=== Attempting XFS overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full - /sbin/mkfs.xfs $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 + ${MKFS_PROG}.xfs $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 [ $? -eq 0 ] && echo "Failed - overwrote fs type ${fs}!" else
049 +1 -1
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ mount -t ext2 $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seq.full 2>&1 \ || _fail "!!! failed to mount" _log "Create xfs fs in file on scratch" -/sbin/mkfs.xfs -f -dfile,name=$SCRATCH_MNT/test.xfs,size=40m \ +${MKFS_PROG}.xfs -f -dfile,name=$SCRATCH_MNT/test.xfs,size=40m \ >> $seq.full 2>&1 \ || _fail "!!! failed to mkfs xfs"
073 +1 -1
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ _verify_copy $imgs.image $SCRATCH_DEV $SCRATCH_MNT echo echo === copying scratch device to single target, large ro device -/sbin/mkfs.xfs -dfile,name=$imgs.source,size=100g | _filter_mkfs 2>/dev/null +${MKFS_PROG}.xfs -dfile,name=$imgs.source,size=100g | _filter_mkfs 2>/dev/null rmdir $imgs.source_dir 2>/dev/null mkdir $imgs.source_dir
common.rc +2 -2
@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ _scratch_mkfs() $MKFS_BTRFS_PROG $MKFS_OPTIONS $* $SCRATCH_DEV > /dev/null ;; *) - /sbin/mkfs -t $FSTYP -- $MKFS_OPTIONS $* $SCRATCH_DEV + yes | $MKFS_PROG -t $FSTYP -- $MKFS_OPTIONS $* $SCRATCH_DEV ;; esac }
@@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ _scratch_mkfs_sized() _scratch_mkfs_xfs -d size=$fssize -b size=$blocksize ;; ext2|ext3|ext4|ext4dev) - /sbin/mkfs.$FSTYP $MKFS_OPTIONS -b $blocksize $SCRATCH_DEV $blocks + yes | ${MKFS_PROG}.$FSTYP $MKFS_OPTIONS -b $blocksize $SCRATCH_DEV $blocks ;; btrfs) $MKFS_BTRFS_PROG $MKFS_OPTIONS -b $fssize $SCRATCH_DEV
Signature · 1 line
1.7.4.1
Quoted 9 lines · Prasad Joshi
If an entire device used for file system creation, the mkfs.ext2/3/4 asks for confirmation before proceeding. Since the device is configured for testing it is safe to assume positive response during mkfs.
The patch also replaces hard coded mkfs path with
MKFS_PROGvariable.Signed-off-by Chaitanya Kulkarni <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Prasad Joshi <[email protected]>
Thanks for submitting a patch, Prasad (and Chaitanya).
Can you please re-submit this? Based on feedback what we're looking for would be:
[PATCH 0/2] description e-mail
[PATCH 1/2] patch that substitutes /sbin/mkfs with ${MKFS_PROG} [PATCH 2/2] patch that adds a '-f' flag to ${MKFS_PROG}.${FSTYP}
for all ext* filesystem types.
Thanks.
-Alex
Quoted 11 lines · Alex Elder
Quoted 9 lines · Prasad Joshi
If an entire device used for file system creation, the mkfs.ext2/3/4 asks for confirmation before proceeding. Since the device is configured for testing it is safe to assume positive response during mkfs.
The patch also replaces hard coded mkfs path with
MKFS_PROGvariable.Signed-off-by Chaitanya Kulkarni <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Prasad Joshi <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
Thanks for submitting a patch, Prasad (and Chaitanya).
Can you please re-submit this? Based on feedback what we're looking for would be:
[PATCH 0/2] description e-mail
[PATCH 1/2] patch that substitutes/sbin/mkfswith ${MKFS_PROG} [PATCH 2/2] patch that adds a '-f' flag to ${MKFS_PROG}.${FSTYP}
for all ext* filesystem types.
Oh, and while I'm thinking about it...
/sbin/mkfs.${FSTYP} and ${MKFS_PROG}.${FSTYP} are most likely incorrect. The switch to MKFS_PROG at least finds where the mkfs executable lies, but in theory anyway there is no guarantee that, for example, the mkfs.xfs program lies in the same directory. The mkfs executable uses the PATH (via execvp()) to find the filesystem-specific mkfs program to use, and I expect we should work the same way.
-Alex
Quoted 10 lines · Prasad Joshi
If an entire device used for file system creation, the mkfs.ext2/3/4 asks for confirmation before proceeding. Since the device is configured for testing it is safe to assume positive response during mkfs.
The patch also replaces hard coded mkfs path with
MKFS_PROGvariable.Signed-off-by Chaitanya Kulkarni <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Prasad Joshi <[email protected]>
Quoted 7 lines
---
032 | 4 ++--049 | 2 +- 073 | 2 +- common.rc | 4 ++-- 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Looks good
Prasad,
This patch has been committed to git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests, master branch, commit ID 9ea06dce.
Thanks
--Rich
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs