linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] xfstests: don't print "do not support" warnings unless verbose is specified

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110829133718.GD12187@thunk.org>
Date:	Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:37:18 -0400
From:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	xfs@....sgi.com, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: don't print "do not support" warnings unless
 verbose is specified

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 03:36:21PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 01:43:22PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > Commit 630421f6d449 attempts to avoid printing the "fallocate not
> > supported" warning if the -q (quiet) option is specified on the
> > command-line.  Unfortunately tests 75 and 112 don't set the -q flag.
> > This causes test failures for file systems that don't support
> > fallocate or the punch hole functionality.
> > 
> > I considered changing tests 75 and 112 to pass -q to fsx, but that
> > would suppress other warning messages that could be legitimate test
> > failures, so I decided to add a new -v (vebose) flag.
> 
> Oh, so now we can have verbose quietness? Or is it quiet verbosity?
> That quickly leads to insanity.... :/
> 
> The quiet flag only suppresses output that is otherwise logged and
> output when a failure occurs. Hence setting the quiet won't cause
> any loss of functionality or error detection for these tests so you
> should just add the quiet flag to the tests.

OK, I'll resubmit a patch which changes the tests (i.e., 75 and 112)
to pass the -q flag to fsx.  I had thought _not_ passing -q was
deliberate, but reviewing the output, it does seem that none of the
!quiet messages are all that important.

					- Ted


--
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