Message-ID: <20240904.170511-plaid.cupcake.bright.comedy-wgajfvBqCgUK@cyphar.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 03:53:07 +1000
From: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc: fstests@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, 
	Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>, 
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>, Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>, 
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, 
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>, 
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfstests v2 2/2] open_by_handle: add tests for u64 mount
 ID

On 2024-09-04, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 6:31 PM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2024-09-03, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 8:41 AM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2024-09-02, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 6:46 PM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now that open_by_handle_at(2) can return u64 mount IDs, do some tests to
> > > > > > make sure they match properly as part of the regular open_by_handle
> > > > > > tests.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240828-exportfs-u64-mount-id-v3-0-10c2c4c16708@cyphar.com/
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > v2:
> > > > > > - Remove -M argument and always do the mount ID tests. [Amir Goldstein]
> > > > > > - Do not error out if the kernel doesn't support STATX_MNT_ID_UNIQUE
> > > > > >   or AT_HANDLE_MNT_ID_UNIQUE. [Amir Goldstein]
> > > > > > - v1: <https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240828103706.2393267-1-cyphar@cyphar.com/>
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks good.
> > > > >
> > > > > You may add:
> > > > >
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > It'd be nice to get a verification that this is indeed tested on the latest
> > > > > upstream and does not regress the tests that run the open_by_handle program.
> > > >
> > > > I've tested that the fallback works on mainline and correctly does the
> > > > test on patched kernels (by running open_by_handle directly) but I
> > > > haven't run the suite yet (still getting my mkosi testing setup working
> > > > to run fstests...).
> > >
> > > I am afraid this has to be tested.
> > > I started testing myself and found that it breaks existing tests.
> > > Even if you make the test completely opt-in as in v1 it need to be
> > > tested and _notrun on old kernels.
> > >
> > > If you have a new version, I can test it until you get your fstests setup
> > > ready, because anyway I would want to check that your test also
> > > works with overlayfs which has some specialized exportfs tests.
> > > Test by running ./check -overlay -g exportfs, but I can also do that for you.
> >
> > I managed to get fstests running, sorry about that...
> >
> > For the v3 I have ready (which includes a new test using -M), the
> > following runs work in my VM:
> >
> >  - ./check -g exportfs
> >  - ./check -overlay -g exportfs
> >
> > Should I check anything else before sending it?
> >
> 
> That should be enough.
> So you have one new test that does not run on upstream kernel
> and runs and passes on patched kernel?

Yes. Both of those suite runs succeed without issues on v6.6.49,
v6.11-rc6 and with the AT_HANDLE_MNT_ID_UNIQUE patches.

I also added skipping logic such that it _should_ work on pre-5.8
kernels (pre-STATX_MNT_ID) as well, but I can't test that at the moment
(mkosi-kernel fails to boot kernels that old it seems...).

I'll send it now.

> > Also, when running the tests I think I may have found a bug? Using
> > overlayfs+xfs leads to the following error when doing ./check -overlay
> > if the scratch device is XFS:
> >
> >   ./common/rc: line 299: _xfs_has_feature: command not found
> >     not run: upper fs needs to support d_type
> >
> > The fix I applied was simply:
> >
> > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> > index 0beaf2ff1126..e6af1b16918f 100644
> > --- a/common/rc
> > +++ b/common/rc
> > @@ -296,6 +296,7 @@ _supports_filetype()
> >         local fstyp=`$DF_PROG $dir | tail -1 | $AWK_PROG '{print $2}'`
> >         case "$fstyp" in
> >         xfs)
> > +               . common/xfs
> >                 _xfs_has_feature $dir ftype
> >                 ;;
> >         ext2|ext3|ext4)
> >
> > Should I include this patch as well, or did I make a mistake somewhere?
> > (I could add the import to the top instead if you'd prefer that.)
> 
> This should already be handled by
> if [ -n "$OVL_BASE_FSTYP" ];then
>         _source_specific_fs $OVL_BASE_FSTYP
> fi
> 
> in common/overlay
> 
> I think what you are missing is to
> export FSTYP=xfs
> as README.overlay suggests.
> 
> It's true that ./check does not *require* defining FSTYP
> and can auto detect the test filesystem, but for running -overlay
> is it a requirement to define the base FSTYP.

Ah okay, I missed that. That fixed the issue, thanks!

> Thanks,
> Amir.

-- 
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists