[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       fstests
Subject:    Re: [PATCH 1/6] xfs: remove support for tools and kernels with v5 support
From:       Zorro Lang <zlang () redhat ! com>
Date:       2024-04-29 14:20:43
Message-ID: 20240429142043.324fmguwtqyouuwb () dell-per750-06-vm-08 ! rhts ! eng ! pek2 ! redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 03:04:51PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 03:32:38 PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > v5 file systems have been the default for more than 10 years.  Drop
> > support for non-v5 enabled kernels and xfsprogs.
> > 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This patch is causing xfs/077 to fail as shown below,
> 
> # ./check xfs/077
> FSTYP         -- xfs (debug)
> PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64 xfs-crc 6.9.0-rc4+ #2 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Mon Apr 29 \
> 08:08:05 GMT 2024 MKFS_OPTIONS  -- -f -f -m crc=1,reflink=0,rmapbt=0, -i sparse=0 \
> /dev/loop6 MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o usrquota,grpquota,prjquota -o \
> context=system_u:object_r:root_t:s0 /dev/loop6 /media/scratch 
> xfs/077 9s ... [not run] Kernel doesn't support meta_uuid feature
> Ran: xfs/077
> Not run: xfs/077
> Passed all 1 tests
> 
> The corresponding configuration file used had the following,
> 
> export TEST_DEV=/dev/loop5
> export TEST_DIR=/media/test
> export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/loop6
> export SCRATCH_MNT=/media/scratch
> 
> MKFS_OPTIONS='-f -m crc=1,reflink=0,rmapbt=0, -i sparse=0'
> MOUNT_OPTIONS='-o usrquota,grpquota,prjquota'

Thanks for finding this issue, the _require_meta_uuid helper or the calling
of _require_meta_uuid looks not correct. The xfs/077 calls _require_meta_uuid
as:

  _supported_fs xfs
  _require_xfs_copy
  _require_scratch
  _require_no_large_scratch_dev
  _require_meta_uuid            <=====
  ...

The x/077 hasn't mkfs on SCRATCH_DEV, but the _require_meta_uuid does
_scratch_xfs_db directly. That looks not right.

I think we should do "_scratch_mkfs ..." before doing _require_meta_uuid.
E.g. mkfs at the beginning of _require_meta_uuid.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Zorro

> 
> -- 
> Chandan
> 


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]