All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] fstests: common: Introduce function to check qgroup correctness
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 08:01:55 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161129210155.GD31101@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161129073303.14776-2-quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 03:32:54PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Old btrfs qgroup test cases uses fix golden output numbers, which limits
> the coverage since they can't handle mount options like compress or
> inode_map, and cause false alert.
> 
> Introduce _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup() function to check qgroup
> correctness using "btrfs check --qgroup-report" function, which will
> follow the way kernel handle qgroup and are proved very reliable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  common/rc | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> index 8c99306..35d2d56 100644
> --- a/common/rc
> +++ b/common/rc
> @@ -3018,6 +3018,25 @@ _require_deletable_scratch_dev_pool()
>  	done
>  }
>  
> +# We check if "btrfs check" support to check qgroup correctness
> +# Old fixed golden output can cover case like compress and inode_map
> +# mount options, which limits the coverage
> +_require_btrfs_check_qgroup()
> +{
> +	_require_command "$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG" btrfs
> +	output=$($BTRFS_UTIL_PROG check --help | grep "qgroup-report")
> +	if [ -z "$output" ]; then
> +		_notrun "$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG too old (must support 'check --qgroup-report')"
> +	fi
> +}

Why wouldn't this just set a global variable that you then
check in _check_scratch_fs and run the _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup()
call then?

What about all the tests that currently run without this
functionality being present? They will now notrun rather than use
the golden output match - this seems like a regression to me,
especially for distro QE testing older kernel/progs combinations...

> +
> +_btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup()
> +{
> +	_require_btrfs_check_qgroup

This needs to go in the test itself before the test is run,
not get hidden in a function call at the end of the test.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-11-29 21:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-29  7:32 [PATCH 00/10] Enhance btrfs qgroup test group coverage to support more mount options Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:32 ` [PATCH 01/10] fstests: common: Introduce function to check qgroup correctness Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  8:16   ` Eryu Guan
2016-11-29  8:44     ` Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29 21:01   ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2016-11-30  0:56     ` Qu Wenruo
2016-11-30  1:23       ` Dave Chinner
2016-11-29  7:32 ` [PATCH 02/10] fstests: btrfs/017: Use new _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup function Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:32 ` [PATCH 03/10] fstests: btrfs/022: Add extra qgroup verification after each work Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:32 ` [PATCH 04/10] fstests: btrfs/028: Use new wrapped _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup function Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:32 ` [PATCH 05/10] fstests: btrfs/042: Add extra qgroup verification Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:32 ` [PATCH 06/10] fstests: btrfs/091: Use _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup other than fixed golden output Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:33 ` [PATCH 07/10] fstests: btrfs/099: Add extra verification for qgroup Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:33 ` [PATCH 08/10] fstests: btrfs/104: Use _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup to replace open codes Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:33 ` [PATCH 09/10] fstests: btrfs/122: Use _btrfs_check_scratch_qgroup to replace open code Qu Wenruo
2016-11-29  7:33 ` [PATCH 10/10] fstests: btrfs/123: " Qu Wenruo

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=20161129210155.GD31101@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.