Message ID | 165950049724.198815.5496412458825635633.stgit@magnolia (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | fstests: random fixes for v2022.07.31 | expand |
on 2022/08/03 12:21, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > Not sure what's up with this new test, but the golden output isn't right > for upstream xfsprogs for-next. Change it to pass there... It failed becuase libxfs code validates v5 feature fields. b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 feature fields") > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > --- > tests/xfs/533.out | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/533.out b/tests/xfs/533.out > index 7deb78a3..439fb16e 100644 > --- a/tests/xfs/533.out > +++ b/tests/xfs/533.out > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > QA output created by 533 > Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC > magicnum = 0 > -bad magic number > +Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? Since this case is designed to detect xfs_db bug, should we filter the output? Best Regards Yang Xu > 0 >
On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:53:31AM +0000, xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com wrote: > on 2022/08/03 12:21, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > > > Not sure what's up with this new test, but the golden output isn't right > > for upstream xfsprogs for-next. Change it to pass there... > > It failed becuase libxfs code validates v5 feature fields. > > b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 feature fields") > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > --- > > tests/xfs/533.out | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/533.out b/tests/xfs/533.out > > index 7deb78a3..439fb16e 100644 > > --- a/tests/xfs/533.out > > +++ b/tests/xfs/533.out > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > > QA output created by 533 > > Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC > > magicnum = 0 > > -bad magic number Ohhh, so this is a V4 output. > > +Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? > > Since this case is designed to detect xfs_db bug, should we filter the > output? Yep. I'll rework this patch to handle V4 and V5. Well, thanks for keeping me on my toes! ;) --D > Best Regards > Yang Xu > > 0 > >
On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 10:06:16PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:53:31AM +0000, xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com wrote: > > on 2022/08/03 12:21, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > > > > > Not sure what's up with this new test, but the golden output isn't right > > > for upstream xfsprogs for-next. Change it to pass there... > > > > It failed becuase libxfs code validates v5 feature fields. > > > > b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 feature fields") > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > > > --- > > > tests/xfs/533.out | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/533.out b/tests/xfs/533.out > > > index 7deb78a3..439fb16e 100644 > > > --- a/tests/xfs/533.out > > > +++ b/tests/xfs/533.out > > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > > > QA output created by 533 > > > Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC > > > magicnum = 0 > > > -bad magic number > > Ohhh, so this is a V4 output. > > > > +Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? > > > > Since this case is designed to detect xfs_db bug, should we filter the > > output? > > Yep. I'll rework this patch to handle V4 and V5. Well, thanks for > keeping me on my toes! ;) Hmm, V4 produces this: --- /tmp/fstests/tests/xfs/533.out 2022-08-02 19:02:12.876335795 -0700 +++ /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/533.out.bad 2022-08-03 22:12:43.596000000 -0700 @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@ QA output created by 533 -Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC magicnum = 0 -Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? 0 So I guess this isn't a V4 output. Which version of xfsprogs and what MKFS_OPTIONS did you use to make this to produce 'bad magic number'? --D > --D > > > Best Regards > > Yang Xu > > > 0 > > >
on 2022/08/04 13:15, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 10:06:16PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:53:31AM +0000, xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com wrote: >>> on 2022/08/03 12:21, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >>>> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> >>>> >>>> Not sure what's up with this new test, but the golden output isn't right >>>> for upstream xfsprogs for-next. Change it to pass there... >>> >>> It failed becuase libxfs code validates v5 feature fields. >>> >>> b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 feature fields") >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> >>>> --- >>>> tests/xfs/533.out | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tests/xfs/533.out b/tests/xfs/533.out >>>> index 7deb78a3..439fb16e 100644 >>>> --- a/tests/xfs/533.out >>>> +++ b/tests/xfs/533.out >>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ >>>> QA output created by 533 >>>> Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC >>>> magicnum = 0 >>>> -bad magic number >> >> Ohhh, so this is a V4 output. >> >>>> +Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? >>> >>> Since this case is designed to detect xfs_db bug, should we filter the >>> output? >> >> Yep. I'll rework this patch to handle V4 and V5. Well, thanks for >> keeping me on my toes! ;) > > Hmm, V4 produces this: > > --- /tmp/fstests/tests/xfs/533.out 2022-08-02 19:02:12.876335795 -0700 > +++ /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/533.out.bad 2022-08-03 22:12:43.596000000 -0700 > @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@ > QA output created by 533 > -Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC > magicnum = 0 > -Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? > 0 > > So I guess this isn't a V4 output. Which version of xfsprogs and what > MKFS_OPTIONS did you use to make this to produce 'bad magic number'? I remember I used xfsprogs master branch and I don't add any special MKFS_OPTIONS. meta-data=/dev/sda7 isize=512 agcount=4, agsize=3276800 blks = sectsz=4096 attr=2, projid32bit=1 = crc=1 finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0 = reflink=1 bigtime=1 inobtcount=1 data = bsize=4096 blocks=13107200, imaxpct=25 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0, ftype=1 log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=16384, version=2 = sectsz=4096 sunit=1 blks, lazy-count=1 realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 local.config MODULAR=0 export TEST_DIR=/mnt/xfstests/test export TEST_DEV=/dev/sda6 export SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt/xfstests/scratch export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/sda7 I have mentioned that xfsprogs commit b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 feature fields") will change output to "-Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem". And this commit is belong to for-next branch that is why I write this case doesn't find this because I use master branch that time. Best Regards Yang Xu > > --D > >> --D >> >>> Best Regards >>> Yang Xu >>>> 0 >>>>
On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 05:31:01AM +0000, xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com wrote: > > > on 2022/08/04 13:15, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 10:06:16PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:53:31AM +0000, xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com wrote: > >>> on 2022/08/03 12:21, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >>>> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > >>>> > >>>> Not sure what's up with this new test, but the golden output isn't right > >>>> for upstream xfsprogs for-next. Change it to pass there... > >>> > >>> It failed becuase libxfs code validates v5 feature fields. > >>> > >>> b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 feature fields") > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org> > >>>> --- > >>>> tests/xfs/533.out | 2 +- > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/tests/xfs/533.out b/tests/xfs/533.out > >>>> index 7deb78a3..439fb16e 100644 > >>>> --- a/tests/xfs/533.out > >>>> +++ b/tests/xfs/533.out > >>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > >>>> QA output created by 533 > >>>> Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC > >>>> magicnum = 0 > >>>> -bad magic number > >> > >> Ohhh, so this is a V4 output. > >> > >>>> +Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? > >>> > >>> Since this case is designed to detect xfs_db bug, should we filter the > >>> output? > >> > >> Yep. I'll rework this patch to handle V4 and V5. Well, thanks for > >> keeping me on my toes! ;) > > > > Hmm, V4 produces this: > > > > --- /tmp/fstests/tests/xfs/533.out 2022-08-02 19:02:12.876335795 -0700 > > +++ /var/tmp/fstests/xfs/533.out.bad 2022-08-03 22:12:43.596000000 -0700 > > @@ -1,5 +1,3 @@ > > QA output created by 533 > > -Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC > > magicnum = 0 > > -Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? > > 0 > > > > So I guess this isn't a V4 output. Which version of xfsprogs and what > > MKFS_OPTIONS did you use to make this to produce 'bad magic number'? > > I remember I used xfsprogs master branch and I don't add any special > MKFS_OPTIONS. > > meta-data=/dev/sda7 isize=512 agcount=4, agsize=3276800 blks > = sectsz=4096 attr=2, projid32bit=1 > = crc=1 finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0 > = reflink=1 bigtime=1 inobtcount=1 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=13107200, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0, ftype=1 > log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=16384, version=2 > = sectsz=4096 sunit=1 blks, lazy-count=1 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > > local.config > MODULAR=0 > export TEST_DIR=/mnt/xfstests/test > export TEST_DEV=/dev/sda6 > export SCRATCH_MNT=/mnt/xfstests/scratch > export SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/sda7 > > I have mentioned that xfsprogs commit b12d5ae5d ("xfs: validate v5 > feature fields") will change output to "-Superblock has bad magic > number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem". And this commit is belong to > for-next branch that is why I write this case doesn't find this because > I use master branch that time. Ah, sorry, I missed your mention of this commit. Ok, so the test was based on master (aka xfsprogs 5.18) and my corrections are based on for-next (future xfsprogs 5.19). Yes, I think the correct fix here is to filter the new output to match the old. I might throw in a _require_scratch_xfs_crc so this test doesn't fail on (deprecated) V4 setups. --D > Best Regards > Yang Xu > > > > --D > > > >> --D > >> > >>> Best Regards > >>> Yang Xu > >>>> 0 > >>>>
diff --git a/tests/xfs/533.out b/tests/xfs/533.out index 7deb78a3..439fb16e 100644 --- a/tests/xfs/533.out +++ b/tests/xfs/533.out @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ QA output created by 533 Allowing write of corrupted data with good CRC magicnum = 0 -bad magic number +Superblock has bad magic number 0x0. Not an XFS filesystem? 0