FSTests Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
* [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation
@ 2019-10-07  7:15 Yang Xu
  2019-10-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Yang Xu @ 2019-10-07  7:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: fstests; +Cc: Yang Xu

On old kernel, since commit ded188b8609 ("xfs: Fix the situation that mount 
operation rejects corrupted XFS") running this case got the mismatched output,
as below:
-----------------------------------
 + check fs
 + corrupt image
 + mount image && modify files
-broken: 1
+broken: 0
 + repair fs
 + mount image (2)
------------------------------------

It fails because the broken is always equal to 0 when _try_scratch_mount
succeed. So remove this wrong assignment operation.

Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
 tests/xfs/097 | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tests/xfs/097 b/tests/xfs/097
index 1cb7d69c..20791738 100755
--- a/tests/xfs/097
+++ b/tests/xfs/097
@@ -81,8 +81,6 @@ done
 echo "+ mount image && modify files"
 broken=1
 if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then
-
-	broken=0
 	for x in `seq 65 70`; do
 		touch "${TESTFILE}.${x}" 2> /dev/null && broken=0
 	done
-- 
2.18.1




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation
  2019-10-07  7:15 [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation Yang Xu
@ 2019-10-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
  2019-10-08  2:39   ` Yang Xu
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Darrick J. Wong @ 2019-10-07 15:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Yang Xu; +Cc: fstests

On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:15PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
> On old kernel, since commit ded188b8609 ("xfs: Fix the situation that mount 
> operation rejects corrupted XFS") running this case got the mismatched output,
> as below:

But why did the output mismatch?  Did the fs heal itself?  Did
allocating 5 more files somehow avoid touching the finobt?  Is the
assignment logic in the loop broken?

--D

> -----------------------------------
>  + check fs
>  + corrupt image
>  + mount image && modify files
> -broken: 1
> +broken: 0
>  + repair fs
>  + mount image (2)
> ------------------------------------
> 
> It fails because the broken is always equal to 0 when _try_scratch_mount
> succeed. So remove this wrong assignment operation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  tests/xfs/097 | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/097 b/tests/xfs/097
> index 1cb7d69c..20791738 100755
> --- a/tests/xfs/097
> +++ b/tests/xfs/097
> @@ -81,8 +81,6 @@ done
>  echo "+ mount image && modify files"
>  broken=1
>  if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then
> -
> -	broken=0
>  	for x in `seq 65 70`; do
>  		touch "${TESTFILE}.${x}" 2> /dev/null && broken=0
>  	done
> -- 
> 2.18.1
> 
> 
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation
  2019-10-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
@ 2019-10-08  2:39   ` Yang Xu
  2019-10-14 16:39     ` Darrick J. Wong
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Yang Xu @ 2019-10-08  2:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Darrick J. Wong; +Cc: fstests



on 2019/10/07 23:12, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:15PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
>> On old kernel, since commit ded188b8609 ("xfs: Fix the situation that mount
>> operation rejects corrupted XFS") running this case got the mismatched output,
>> as below:
> 
> But why did the output mismatch?  Did the fs heal itself?  Did
> allocating 5 more files somehow avoid touching the finobt?  Is the
> assignment logic in the loop broken?

The output mismatch because on old kernel, we can mount the corrupted 
xfs and touch action will be refused. so broken is equal to 0.
The fs doesn't heal ifself.
allocating 5 more file will touch the finobt.

You can see this url
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/commit/?id=ded188b86096e2845e59dedae6050c7f254a96b

eg xfs/087, they all delete "broken=0" before allocationg 5 more file. 
commit ded188b86 compatibled old kernel(permit mount and refuse touch) 
and new kernel(refuse mount) behavior on corrupted xfs.  Or, I 
misunderstand this case?
> 
> --D
> 
>> -----------------------------------
>>   + check fs
>>   + corrupt image
>>   + mount image && modify files
>> -broken: 1
>> +broken: 0
>>   + repair fs
>>   + mount image (2)
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> It fails because the broken is always equal to 0 when _try_scratch_mount
>> succeed. So remove this wrong assignment operation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/xfs/097 | 2 --
>>   1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tests/xfs/097 b/tests/xfs/097
>> index 1cb7d69c..20791738 100755
>> --- a/tests/xfs/097
>> +++ b/tests/xfs/097
>> @@ -81,8 +81,6 @@ done
>>   echo "+ mount image && modify files"
>>   broken=1
>>   if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then
>> -
>> -	broken=0
>>   	for x in `seq 65 70`; do
>>   		touch "${TESTFILE}.${x}" 2> /dev/null && broken=0
>>   	done
>> -- 
>> 2.18.1
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation
  2019-10-08  2:39   ` Yang Xu
@ 2019-10-14 16:39     ` Darrick J. Wong
  2019-10-15  6:27       ` Yang Xu
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Darrick J. Wong @ 2019-10-14 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Yang Xu; +Cc: fstests

On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:39:59AM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
> 
> 
> on 2019/10/07 23:12, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:15PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
> > > On old kernel, since commit ded188b8609 ("xfs: Fix the situation that mount
> > > operation rejects corrupted XFS") running this case got the mismatched output,
> > > as below:
> > 
> > But why did the output mismatch?  Did the fs heal itself?  Did
> > allocating 5 more files somehow avoid touching the finobt?  Is the
> > assignment logic in the loop broken?
> 
> The output mismatch because on old kernel, we can mount the corrupted xfs
> and touch action will be refused. so broken is equal to 0.
> The fs doesn't heal ifself.
> allocating 5 more file will touch the finobt.
> 
> You can see this url
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/commit/?id=ded188b86096e2845e59dedae6050c7f254a96b
> 
> eg xfs/087, they all delete "broken=0" before allocationg 5 more file.
> commit ded188b86 compatibled old kernel(permit mount and refuse touch) and
> new kernel(refuse mount) behavior on corrupted xfs.  Or, I misunderstand
> this case?

How old is the kernel?  At some point (4.10, I think?) we added a patch
to reserve metadata blocks for future free inode btree expansion.  That
required us to count the blocks in the finobt, at which point xfs/097's
behavior changed such that the fs doesn't mount after the test corrupts
the finobt.

--D

> > 
> > --D
> > 
> > > -----------------------------------
> > >   + check fs
> > >   + corrupt image
> > >   + mount image && modify files
> > > -broken: 1
> > > +broken: 0
> > >   + repair fs
> > >   + mount image (2)
> > > ------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > It fails because the broken is always equal to 0 when _try_scratch_mount
> > > succeed. So remove this wrong assignment operation.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > > ---
> > >   tests/xfs/097 | 2 --
> > >   1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/097 b/tests/xfs/097
> > > index 1cb7d69c..20791738 100755
> > > --- a/tests/xfs/097
> > > +++ b/tests/xfs/097
> > > @@ -81,8 +81,6 @@ done
> > >   echo "+ mount image && modify files"
> > >   broken=1
> > >   if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then
> > > -
> > > -	broken=0
> > >   	for x in `seq 65 70`; do
> > >   		touch "${TESTFILE}.${x}" 2> /dev/null && broken=0
> > >   	done
> > > -- 
> > > 2.18.1
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation
  2019-10-14 16:39     ` Darrick J. Wong
@ 2019-10-15  6:27       ` Yang Xu
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Yang Xu @ 2019-10-15  6:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Darrick J. Wong; +Cc: fstests



on 2019/10/15 0:39, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 10:39:59AM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
>>
>>
>> on 2019/10/07 23:12, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 03:15:15PM +0800, Yang Xu wrote:
>>>> On old kernel, since commit ded188b8609 ("xfs: Fix the situation that mount
>>>> operation rejects corrupted XFS") running this case got the mismatched output,
>>>> as below:
>>>
>>> But why did the output mismatch?  Did the fs heal itself?  Did
>>> allocating 5 more files somehow avoid touching the finobt?  Is the
>>> assignment logic in the loop broken?
>>
>> The output mismatch because on old kernel, we can mount the corrupted xfs
>> and touch action will be refused. so broken is equal to 0.
>> The fs doesn't heal ifself.
>> allocating 5 more file will touch the finobt.
>>
>> You can see this url
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/commit/?id=ded188b86096e2845e59dedae6050c7f254a96b
>>
>> eg xfs/087, they all delete "broken=0" before allocationg 5 more file.
>> commit ded188b86 compatibled old kernel(permit mount and refuse touch) and
>> new kernel(refuse mount) behavior on corrupted xfs.  Or, I misunderstand
>> this case?
> 
> How old is the kernel?  At some point (4.10, I think?) we added a patch
> to reserve metadata blocks for future free inode btree expansion.  That
> required us to count the blocks in the finobt, at which point xfs/097's
> behavior changed such that the fs doesn't mount after the test corrupts
> the finobt.
I test this case on kernel-3.10.0-1062.el7.x86_64.
I find the patch you said to reserve metadata blocks for future free 
inode btree expansion. This kernel doesn't backport this commit 
76d771b4 ("xfs: use per-AG reservations for the finobt"), so it permmits 
to mount.

I can understand your meaning. But from xfstests commit ded188b86, it 
looks like refuse touch or refuse mount is acceptable for xfstests.

Also, xfs/087 is a similar case but it sets broken=1 instead of broken 
=0.  Before this kernel commit 76d771b4, xfs/087(xfs/097) permits mount 
and refuse touch, after this commit, xfs/087(xfs/097) refuses mount.
I think we should keep xfs/097 consistent with xfs/087. What do you 
think about it?

ps:my patch is intend to fix the inconsistent of broken assignment 
operation that xfstests commit ded188b86 introduced.

Thanks
Yang Xu

> 
> --D
> 
>>>
>>> --D
>>>
>>>> -----------------------------------
>>>>    + check fs
>>>>    + corrupt image
>>>>    + mount image && modify files
>>>> -broken: 1
>>>> +broken: 0
>>>>    + repair fs
>>>>    + mount image (2)
>>>> ------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> It fails because the broken is always equal to 0 when _try_scratch_mount
>>>> succeed. So remove this wrong assignment operation.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    tests/xfs/097 | 2 --
>>>>    1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tests/xfs/097 b/tests/xfs/097
>>>> index 1cb7d69c..20791738 100755
>>>> --- a/tests/xfs/097
>>>> +++ b/tests/xfs/097
>>>> @@ -81,8 +81,6 @@ done
>>>>    echo "+ mount image && modify files"
>>>>    broken=1
>>>>    if _try_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full 2>&1; then
>>>> -
>>>> -	broken=0
>>>>    	for x in `seq 65 70`; do
>>>>    		touch "${TESTFILE}.${x}" 2> /dev/null && broken=0
>>>>    	done
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.18.1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-10-07  7:15 [PATCH] xfs/097: Remove wrong broken assignment operation Yang Xu
2019-10-07 15:12 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-08  2:39   ` Yang Xu
2019-10-14 16:39     ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-10-15  6:27       ` Yang Xu

FSTests Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/0 fstests/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 fstests fstests/ https://lore.kernel.org/fstests \
		fstests@vger.kernel.org linux-fstests@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index fstests

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.fstests


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox