generic/441: whitelist gfs2 for full test
PATCH RESEND 1/1 generic/441: whitelist gfs2 for full test
From: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
gfs2 passes the full-scale generic/441 test with the patch that converts it to use errseq_t reporting for fsync.
--- tests/generic/441 | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
tests/generic/441 +1 -1
@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ case $FSTYP in btrfs) _notrun "btrfs has a specialized test for this" ;; - ext3|ext4|xfs) + ext3|ext4|gfs2|xfs) # Do the more thorough test if we have a logdev _has_logdev && sflag='' ;;
Signature · 1 line
2.14.3
Hi Jeff,
Quoted 6 lines · Jeff Layton
From: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
gfs2 passes the full-scale generic/441 test with the patch that converts it to use
errseq_treporting for fsync.Signed-off-by Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
Sorry for letting you resend the same patch again and again, but I didn't get any feedback on my previous replies to the patch.
Please see
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9868465/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9952475/
Quoted 9 lines
--- tests/generic/441 | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)tests/generic/441 +0
-0
tests/generic/441 case $FSTYP in · line 63
Quoted 7 lines
tests/generic/441 +1
-1@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ case $FSTYP in btrfs) _notrun "btrfs has a specialized test for this" ;; - ext3|ext4|xfs) + ext3|ext4|gfs2|xfs) # Do the more thorough test if we have a logdev _has_logdev && sflag=''
So my concern remains, _scratch_mkfs doesn't create gfs2 with external log device even if we set SCRATCH_LOGDEV and USE_EXTERNAL=yes, i.e. _has_logdev returns true. So with this modification, gfs2 still runs with internal log (and test still *fails* with v4.16 kernel, I hit the same failure as in the second link above).
If running gfs2 test with internal log is expected, I think we can run the test in full-scale mode unconditionally for gfs2, as suggested in above two replies. i.e. something like
ext3|ext4|xfs) # Do the more thorough test if we have a logdev _has_logdev && sflag='' ;; gfs2) # <comments here> sflag='' ;; *) ;;
If gfs2 really requires external log to run in full-scale test, I think we should also add external log device support to _scratch_mkfs().
Any comments?
Thanks,
Eryu
Quoted 55 lines · Eryu Guan
Hi Jeff,
Quoted 6 lines · Jeff Layton
From: Jeff Layton <[email protected]>
gfs2 passes the full-scale generic/441 test with the patch that converts it to use
errseq_treporting for fsync.Signed-off-by Jeff Layton <[email protected]>Sorry for letting you resend the same patch again and again, but I didn't get any feedback on my previous replies to the patch.
Please see
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9868465/
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9952475/Quoted 9 lines
--- tests/generic/441 | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)tests/generic/441 +0
-0tests/generic/441 case $FSTYP in · line 63
Quoted 7 lines
tests/generic/441 +1
-1@@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ case $FSTYP in btrfs) _notrun "btrfs has a specialized test for this" ;; - ext3|ext4|xfs) + ext3|ext4|gfs2|xfs) # Do the more thorough test if we have a logdev _has_logdev && sflag=''So my concern remains,
_scratch_mkfsdoesn't create gfs2 with external log device even if we setSCRATCH_LOGDEVand USE_EXTERNAL=yes, i.e._has_logdevreturns true. So with this modification, gfs2 still runs with internal log (and test still *fails* with v4.16 kernel, I hit the same failure as in the second link above).If running gfs2 test with internal log is expected, I think we can run the test in full-scale mode unconditionally for gfs2, as suggested in above two replies. i.e. something like
ext3|ext4|xfs) # Do the more thorough test if we have a logdev _has_logdev && sflag='' ;; gfs2) # <comments here> sflag='' ;; *) ;;
Quoted 4 lines
If gfs2 really requires external log to run in full-scale test, I think we should also add external log device support to
_scratch_mkfs().Any comments?
My apologies. I somehow missed your earlier replies and I think I made a mistake in testing gfs2 that resulted in the error not occurring when it normally would.
Please just disregard this patch. Sorry for the noise.
Signature · 1 line
Jeff Layton <[email protected]>