Re: [PATCH xfstests v2 2/2] open_by_handle: add tests for u64 mount ID

[Aleksa Sarai]

On 2024-09-03, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 8:41 AM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On 2024-09-02, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 2, 2024 at 6:46 PM Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > > > Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > 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@xxxxxxxxxx/>
> > >
> > > Looks good.
> > >
> > > You may add:
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > 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?

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.)

Thanks.

> 
> Thanks,
> Amir.

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature