Re: [PATCH] xfs/444: add check for xfs_db write bno array

From: Eryu Guan <guaneryu@gmail.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: yang xu <xuyang.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>, fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs/444: add check for xfs_db write bno array
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 14:00:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180416060005.GJ2932@desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180413134210.GD5572@dastard>

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 11:42:10PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 12:36:12PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> > > > But this issue looks like a bug in xfsprogs to me, not a missing feature
> > > > in xfsprogs on RHEL7, so I tend to fail the test instead of adding a new
> > > > _require rule & _notrun the test. And in this case, IMHO, I don't think
> > > > it's necessary to do any update to the test, just leave the test as it
> > > > is and file a new bug in Red Hat bugzilla.
> > > 
> > > ... this isn't a RHEL specific issue - it's an xfsprogs version
> > > issue.  i.e.  any older distro that has a binary with a broken
> > > "write array" command will fail this test. None of them are going to
> > > get updated xfsprogs packages, so like having an old mkfs.xfs
> > > binary, this test should run conditionally on having a version of
> > > xfs_db that actually works correctly....
> > 
> > But I still think it's a pure bug in xfsprogs, not xfsprogs version
> > issue nor a behavior change in xfsprogs, as we did support "write via
> > array indexing", just that it was broken in a certain case, and commit
> > 4222d000ed3b fixed that bug. We should expose bugs by letting the test
> > fail, not paper over it by _notrun the test. 
> 
> Yes, it's a bug in xfsprogs. But it's a bug in a diagnostic
> utility that is only used by test infrastructure and XFS
> developers.

OK, I got your point now, it's a bug in a diagnostic tool that is only
used by XFS developers as a test infrastructure, so we can treat it as a
infrastructure dependency as all other _require rules. I think that
makes sense in this case. Thanks for the explanation!

yang xu, would you mind sending a v2 patch as Dave suggested? Thanks!

Eryu

> 
> Yes, it's ialso fixed in recent version of xfsprogs, but you know
> very well that we test distros that have ancient xfsprogs and will
> never have this issue fixed in them. We use detectiona nd notrun to
> avoid tests they should not run all the time, and I don't see how
> this is any different.
> 
> I really don't understand why you are pushing back on this - why
> should this specific infrastructure deficiency cause test failures,
> when all the existing infrastructure support checks cause tests to
> notrun rather than fail?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Dave.
> -- 
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com