Eric Sandeen
2013-Mar-13 16:01 UTC
[PATCH] xfstests: enable test 032 (mkfs overwrite) for btrfs
Now that btrfs has an "-f" arg, we can test that it doesn''t improperly overwrite other filesystems in 032 like we do for xfs. Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> --- diff --git a/032 b/032 index bf88492..89fb225 100755 --- a/032 +++ b/032 @@ -38,12 +38,18 @@ rm -f $seq.full . ./common.filter # real QA test starts here -_supported_fs xfs +_supported_fs xfs btrfs _supported_os Linux _require_nobigloopfs _require_scratch +# mkfs.btrfs did not have overwrite detection at first +if [ "$FSTYP" == "btrfs" ]; then + grep -q ''force overwrite'' `echo $MKFS_BTRFS_PROG | awk ''{print $1}''` || \ + _notrun "Installed mkfs.btrfs does not support -f option" +fi + echo "Silence is golden." for fs in `echo ${MKFS_PROG}.* | sed -e ''s/.sbin.mkfs.//g''` do @@ -61,7 +67,7 @@ do [ $fs = gfs2 ] && preop="echo y |" && preargs="-p lock_nolock -j 1" [ $fs = reiserfs ] && preop="echo y |" && preargs="-f" # cramfs mkfs requires a directory argument - [ $fs = cramfs ] && preargs=/proc/fs/xfs + [ $fs = cramfs ] && preargs=/proc/fs [ $fs = ext2 ] && preargs="-F" [ $fs = ext3 ] && preargs="-F" [ $fs = ext4 ] && preargs="-F" @@ -77,8 +83,8 @@ do if [ $? -eq 0 ] ; then # next, ensure we don''t overwrite it - echo "=== Attempting XFS overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full - ${MKFS_PROG}.xfs $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 + echo "=== Attempting $FSTYP overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full + ${MKFS_PROG}.$FSTYP $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 [ $? -eq 0 ] && echo "Failed - overwrote fs type ${fs}!" else -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Rich Johnston
2013-Mar-15 17:07 UTC
Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enable test 032 (mkfs overwrite) for btrfs
Eric, Thanks once more for the patch. Once I finally got the correct version of mkfs.btrfs this looks good. Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com> Interesting that the default make install of btrfs-progs did not install over my btrfsprogs rpm. Was running SLES11 SP2 with btrfsprogs-0.19-5.31.1.x86_64. It did not put mkfs.btrfs in /sbin. This did however, validate all the error paths ;). --Rich On 03/13/2013 11:01 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:> Now that btrfs has an "-f" arg, we can test that it doesn''t > improperly overwrite other filesystems in 032 like we do > for xfs. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> > --- > > diff --git a/032 b/032 > index bf88492..89fb225 100755 > --- a/032 > +++ b/032 > @@ -38,12 +38,18 @@ rm -f $seq.full > . ./common.filter > > # real QA test starts here > -_supported_fs xfs > +_supported_fs xfs btrfs > _supported_os Linux > > _require_nobigloopfs > _require_scratch > > +# mkfs.btrfs did not have overwrite detection at first > +if [ "$FSTYP" == "btrfs" ]; then > + grep -q ''force overwrite'' `echo $MKFS_BTRFS_PROG | awk ''{print $1}''` || \ > + _notrun "Installed mkfs.btrfs does not support -f option" > +fi > + > echo "Silence is golden." > for fs in `echo ${MKFS_PROG}.* | sed -e ''s/.sbin.mkfs.//g''` > do > @@ -61,7 +67,7 @@ do > [ $fs = gfs2 ] && preop="echo y |" && preargs="-p lock_nolock -j 1" > [ $fs = reiserfs ] && preop="echo y |" && preargs="-f" > # cramfs mkfs requires a directory argument > - [ $fs = cramfs ] && preargs=/proc/fs/xfs > + [ $fs = cramfs ] && preargs=/proc/fs > [ $fs = ext2 ] && preargs="-F" > [ $fs = ext3 ] && preargs="-F" > [ $fs = ext4 ] && preargs="-F" > @@ -77,8 +83,8 @@ do > > if [ $? -eq 0 ] ; then > # next, ensure we don''t overwrite it > - echo "=== Attempting XFS overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full > - ${MKFS_PROG}.xfs $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 > + echo "=== Attempting $FSTYP overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full > + ${MKFS_PROG}.$FSTYP $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 > > [ $? -eq 0 ] && echo "Failed - overwrote fs type ${fs}!" > else > > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs >_______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Rich Johnston
2013-Mar-15 17:11 UTC
Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enable test 032 (mkfs overwrite) for btrfs
This patch has been commited. Thanks --Rich commit 99eb53da9c08148132cdf3cd401b248e6a0d96c5 Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> Date: Wed Mar 13 16:01:00 2013 +0000 xfstests: enable test 032 (mkfs overwrite) for btrfs Now that btrfs has an "-f" arg, we can test that it doesn''t improperly overwrite other filesystems in 032 like we do for xfs. Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com> _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Eric Sandeen
2013-Mar-15 17:12 UTC
Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enable test 032 (mkfs overwrite) for btrfs
On 3/15/13 12:07 PM, Rich Johnston wrote:> Eric, > > Thanks once more for the patch. Once I finally got the correct version of mkfs.btrfs this looks good. > > Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com> > > Interesting that the default make install of btrfs-progs did not install over my btrfsprogs rpm. > > Was running SLES11 SP2 with btrfsprogs-0.19-5.31.1.x86_64. > > It did not put mkfs.btrfs in /sbin. This did however, validate all the error paths ;).Heh ;) Well, mixing & matching upstream installs from source w/ rpm-packaged binaries is usually asking for trouble. I don''t think it''s a bug, just bad administrative practice ;) -Eric> --Rich > > > > > On 03/13/2013 11:01 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Now that btrfs has an "-f" arg, we can test that it doesn''t >> improperly overwrite other filesystems in 032 like we do >> for xfs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com> >> --- >> >> diff --git a/032 b/032 >> index bf88492..89fb225 100755 >> --- a/032 >> +++ b/032 >> @@ -38,12 +38,18 @@ rm -f $seq.full >> . ./common.filter >> >> # real QA test starts here >> -_supported_fs xfs >> +_supported_fs xfs btrfs >> _supported_os Linux >> >> _require_nobigloopfs >> _require_scratch >> >> +# mkfs.btrfs did not have overwrite detection at first >> +if [ "$FSTYP" == "btrfs" ]; then >> + grep -q ''force overwrite'' `echo $MKFS_BTRFS_PROG | awk ''{print $1}''` || \ >> + _notrun "Installed mkfs.btrfs does not support -f option" >> +fi >> + >> echo "Silence is golden." >> for fs in `echo ${MKFS_PROG}.* | sed -e ''s/.sbin.mkfs.//g''` >> do >> @@ -61,7 +67,7 @@ do >> [ $fs = gfs2 ] && preop="echo y |" && preargs="-p lock_nolock -j 1" >> [ $fs = reiserfs ] && preop="echo y |" && preargs="-f" >> # cramfs mkfs requires a directory argument >> - [ $fs = cramfs ] && preargs=/proc/fs/xfs >> + [ $fs = cramfs ] && preargs=/proc/fs >> [ $fs = ext2 ] && preargs="-F" >> [ $fs = ext3 ] && preargs="-F" >> [ $fs = ext4 ] && preargs="-F" >> @@ -77,8 +83,8 @@ do >> >> if [ $? -eq 0 ] ; then >> # next, ensure we don''t overwrite it >> - echo "=== Attempting XFS overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full >> - ${MKFS_PROG}.xfs $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 >> + echo "=== Attempting $FSTYP overwrite of $fs..." >>$seq.full >> + ${MKFS_PROG}.$FSTYP $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full 2>&1 >> >> [ $? -eq 0 ] && echo "Failed - overwrote fs type ${fs}!" >> else >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> xfs mailing list >> xfs@oss.sgi.com >> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs >> > >-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Linda Walsh
2013-Mar-16 12:14 UTC
Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enable test 032 (mkfs overwrite) for btrfs
Eric Sandeen wrote:>> >> It did not put mkfs.btrfs in /sbin. This did however, validate all the error paths ;). > Heh ;) > Well, mixing & matching upstream installs from source w/ rpm-packaged binaries is usually asking for trouble. > I don''t think it''s a bug, just bad administrative practice ;)---- SuSE is moving most if not all of their boot-related binaries off of "/" and putting them in /usr, requiring that you either have 1 partition for / and /usr or you run their initrd that will pre-mount /usr on "/". Supposedly this is a requirement of moving the the MS-compat boot architecture, "systemd" and is being done by all the distros... (supposedly)... At least RedHat and SuSE are going that way... It''s great to boot up in single-user from your hard disk and be told mount needs libs on a yet-to-be mounted partition... ;-/ _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs