linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enable many tests to run on ext2/3/4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090524143945.GA32554@infradead.org>
Date:	Sun, 24 May 2009 10:39:46 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc:	xfs mailing list <xfs@....sgi.com>,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enable many tests to run on ext2/3/4

Wow, that's a nice start.  The only important thing missing is checking
the filesystems after each test run for the non-xfs case.

Maybe we should put this in in stages?  The _supported_fs generic
thing is a nice cleanup already for the existing xfs/nfs/udf setup
and should go in ASAP.

The _scratch_mkfs output fix in 069 could also be a separate patch.

The _setup_generic_testdir should be generalized to match XFS for the
default case and just set testdir in _setup_testdir instead of
another function.  Also the comment there should be updated.

Same for _cleanup_testdir.

Btw, the way udf and nfs are currently handled look not very nice to me.
We should not set up the test device by default for any filesystem but
rather have a -setup or similar option to set it up if needed.

In common I would indeed prefer a new fstype option, but we might aswell
put the current version in as-is.  Especially if we could tie up a really
generic fstype= that wouldn't require listing the filesystems if they
don't require special mount options or similar.

The only thing preventing that is as far as I can see the current difference
in _require_scratch for xfs and udf vs the rest.  Which looks really weird
to me, need to investigate what's going on.

As for the generic group I must say I don't like it very much, the
filtering of notrun (maybe only notrun because of the filesystem type
mismatch) sounds much better to me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html