Linux-Fsdevel Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com> To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>, "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>, fstests <fstests@vger.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>, overlayfs <linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] overlay: test encode/decode overlay file handles Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 19:06:51 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180116110651.GK3102@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxhTR70XdKm39r=TA_SktySHM=Y1qH4A0Eex37Own6k7Kw@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 12:53:38PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 9:38 AM, Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 07, 2018 at 08:07:24PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > >> - Check encode/write/decode/read content of lower/upper file handles > >> - Check encode/decode/write/read content of lower/upper file handles > >> - Check decode/read of unlinked lower/upper files and directories > >> - Check decode/read of lower file handles after copy up, link and unlink > >> - Check decode/read of lower file handles after rename of parent and self > > > > I'm wondering that if this should be split into multiple tests somehow, > > e.g. tests on regular files, tests on dirs and tests on hardlinks? It > > might be eaiser to review and debug when there're test failures. But I > > have no strong preference on this. > > > > I prefer not splitting the test, this is a classic test with sub-test cases. > I may end up splitting the dir rename tests (open_by_handle -i/-o) > to conform with a similar split that you requested in the generic test. > > >> > >> This test does not cover connectable file handles of non-directories, > >> because name_to_handle_at() syscall does not support requesting > >> connectable file handles. > >> > >> This test covers only encode/decode of file handles for overlayfs > >> configuration of lower and upper on the same fs. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > >> --- > >> tests/overlay/050 | 291 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> tests/overlay/050.out | 50 +++++++++ > >> tests/overlay/group | 1 + > >> 3 files changed, 342 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100755 tests/overlay/050 > >> create mode 100644 tests/overlay/050.out > > > > I ran the test on your ovl-nfs-export-v2 branch and saw failures like: > > > > --- tests/overlay/050.out 2018-01-16 14:51:11.350000000 +0800 > > +++ /root/xfstests/results//xfs_4k_crc/overlay/050.out.bad 2018-01-16 15:08:43.487000000 +0800 > > @@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ > > test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT/lowertestdir/subdir -p -o lower_subdir_file_handles > > test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i upper_file_handles > > test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i lower_file_handles > > +open_by_handle() returned 116 incorrectly on a linked dir! > > test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i upper_subdir_file_handles > > test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i lower_subdir_file_handles > > +open_by_handle() returned 116 incorrectly on a linked dir! > > test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT/lowertestdir.new -rp -i lower_subdir_file_handles > > +open_by_handle() returned 116 incorrectly on a linked dir! > > > > Are these failures expected? > > > > No. not expected. I wonder which base fs did you test with? > Did you have OVERLAY_FS_VERIFY=y in config or verify=on in MOUNT_OPTIONS? > (Not that I know any of the above should matter) I didn't have OVERLAY_FS_VERIFY set in .config, but I did mount with "-o verify=on", and underlying fs is xfs. Here is the screenshot: [root@bootp-73-5-205 xfstests]# OVERLAY_MOUNT_OPTIONS="-o verify=on" ./check -s xfs_4k_crc -overlay overlay/050 SECTION -- xfs_4k_crc RECREATING -- overlay on /mnt/testarea/test FSTYP -- overlay PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 bootp-73-5-205 4.15.0-rc2.ovl+ MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -b size=4k -m crc=1 /mnt/testarea/scratch MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o verify=on /mnt/testarea/scratch /mnt/testarea/scratch/ovl-mnt overlay/050 - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests/results//xfs_4k_crc/overlay/050.out.bad) --- tests/overlay/050.out 2018-01-16 14:51:11.350000000 +0800 +++ /root/xfstests/results//xfs_4k_crc/overlay/050.out.bad 2018-01-16 19:01:54.984000000 +0800 @@ -45,6 +45,9 @@ test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT/lowertestdir/subdir -p -o lower_subdir_file_handles test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i upper_file_handles test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i lower_file_handles +open_by_handle() returned 116 incorrectly on a linked dir! test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i upper_subdir_file_handles test_file_handles SCRATCH_MNT -rp -i lower_subdir_file_handles +open_by_handle() returned 116 incorrectly on a linked dir! ... (Run 'diff -u tests/overlay/050.out /root/xfstests/results//xfs_4k_crc/overlay/050.out.bad' to see the entire diff) Ran: overlay/050 Failures: overlay/050 Failed 1 of 1 tests And I just tried with ext4 as underlying fs and got the same result. > > Do you see any overlayfs warnings in dmesg? No, there's no warnings nor other useful information in dmesg, just mount/umount xfs and drop caches messages. Thanks, Eryu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-16 11:06 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-01-07 18:07 [PATCH 0/7] Overlayfs exportfs tests Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 1/7] open_by_handle: store and load file handles from file Amir Goldstein 2018-01-11 11:59 ` Eryu Guan 2018-01-11 15:59 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-01-23 13:56 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 2/7] open_by_handle: verify dir content only with -r flag Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 3/7] generic/exportfs: golden output is not silent Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 4/7] generic/exportfs: store and load file handles from file Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 5/7] generic/exportfs: add a test case for renamed parent dir Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 6/7] overlay: test encode/decode overlay file handles Amir Goldstein 2018-01-16 7:38 ` Eryu Guan 2018-01-16 10:53 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-01-16 11:06 ` Eryu Guan [this message] 2018-01-16 15:09 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-01-07 18:07 ` [PATCH 7/7] overlay: test encode/decode of non-samefs " Amir Goldstein 2018-01-16 7:42 ` Eryu Guan 2018-01-16 8:46 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-01-11 11:43 ` [PATCH 0/7] Overlayfs exportfs tests Eryu Guan 2018-01-11 11:52 ` Amir Goldstein 2018-01-12 11:52 ` Eryu Guan 2018-01-12 13:07 ` Amir Goldstein
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20180116110651.GK3102@eguan.usersys.redhat.com \ --to=eguan@redhat.com \ --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \ --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \ --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \ --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).