RE: [PATCH v3 3/3] ovl: do not set overlay.opaque for new directories

From: "Yurkov, Vyacheslav" <Vyacheslav.Yurkov@bruker.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Vyacheslav Yurkov <uvv.mail@gmail.com>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
	overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 3/3] ovl: do not set overlay.opaque for new directories
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 16:29:09 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AM8PR10MB4161781D50CC2656A933D3CE863E9@AM8PR10MB4161.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxhN6t1fke1XxRndb9UN1M2sY9LVL9zKW_xj9xsXUrhr-Q@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2294 bytes --]

Hi Amir,
See below.

> Maybe.
> Failure of overlay/075 on master is known.
> Failure of overlay/065 on master was fixed by xfstests commit
> * 6159ae7f - overlay/065: Adapt test to relaxed rules
> so you may want to update your xfstests copy.

Using the latest master now, 065 is still failing for me.

> Failure of overlay/005 is not familiar to me and the
> attached log is missing all the output of the test -
> it just has the summary.

The reason was simple, it required xfs as underlying file system (and support in the kernel), but I had only ext4.

> Worst yet, according to summary, all those test do not run in your setup:
> Not run: overlay/001 overlay/004 overlay/008 overlay/015 overlay/020
> overlay/021 overlay/025 overlay/032 overlay/045 overlay/046
> overlay/056 overlay/064 overlay/100 overlay/101 overlay/102
> overlay/103 overlay/104 overlay/105 overlay/106 overlay/107
> overlay/108 overlay/109 overlay/110 overlay/111 overlay/112
> overlay/113 overlay/114 overlay/115 overlay/116 overlay/117
> 
> Can you provide the full log to understand the reason or figure it out yourself
> and fix this.
> If you are running a special setup that is fine, it doesn't have to
> run all the test
> (as long as you know why), but in order to verify that your patches did not
> break other setups, you need to test with a common setup where all the
> above tests run and pass, short of overlay/075 which is a known upstream
> issue.

It seems most of them require unionmount testsuite, which is not a part of xfstests package, and I missed your hint that I should check README.overlay ☹.
Some of the other not-running tests needed more spaces (> 1GB), which I don't have on my device. And a few more required a dedicated user/group on the system.

I added unionmount testsuite and sending my two test results.

> > v2 indeed caused a few more failures on top of that:
> > Failures: overlay/005 overlay/065 overlay/070 overlay/071 overlay/075
> > Failed 5 of 93 tests
> >
> 
> I'm a bit surprised that tests overlay/068 overlay/069 did not fail with v2
> Maybe they did not run and you did not notice that in the report?

It did not indeed.

Anyways, v3 results look pretty good now, I think.

Regards,
Vyacheslav

- confidential -

[-- Attachment #2: xfstests-v2.tar.xz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 25716 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: xfstests-v3.tar.xz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 25460 bytes --]