From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from imap.thunk.org ([74.207.234.97]:33827 "EHLO imap.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750713AbcBJX22 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:28:28 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:28:26 -0500 From: "Theodore Ts'o" Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] xfstests: do not unmount tmpfs during remount Message-ID: <20160210232826.GK26922@thunk.org> References: <1455069001-17846-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <1455069001-17846-6-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> <20160210060716.GV19486@dastard> <20160210160732.GE26922@thunk.org> <20160210230700.GA19486@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160210230700.GA19486@dastard> Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Chinner Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, hughd@google.com, Junho Ryu List-ID: On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:07:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > No, it's not really the options that are the problem here. The > problem is -o remount vs unmount/mount and what the test is actually > expecting. > > I'd say "_scratch_remount" should do "-o remount" unconditionally > (least surprise) and the current _scratch_remount should be changed > to something like _scratch_cycle_mount(). That way both can take > options, but it's clear they do different things. tmpfs can simply > implement them the same way. Well, I can do that, but it's going to be a huge patch --- the vast majority of the calls to _scratch_remount in the tree (over 100) would have to be changed to _scratch_cycle_mount, because they are just doing a _scratch_umount / _scratch_mount without taking any arguments to change the mount option. It is this patch that adds the calls that is using -o remount to change mount options for generic/003 and generic/306 and tmpfs. This is why I suggested adding _scratch_change_mount_opts because it changes the smallest number of things, and keeps _scratch_mount to have the same semantic value. But if you want me to sweep through the entire tree changing _scratch_remount to _scratch_cycle_mount, I suppose I can do that. It's not going to be a small patch, though...... - Ted