On 12/15/14 3:06 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 11:19:43PM +0100, Dushan Tcholich wrote: >> >> This is initial xfstests implementation for Reiser4 filesystem. >> > > Policy question to the wider audience: should we support out of tree > filesystems in fstests? I can't verify the patches nor maintain > support for such filesystems, nor is there a wide developer or > distro demand for testing such filesystems. If there's only one or > two developers that need support for reiser4, then it might be best > for to maintain the xfstests patches out of tree, too. > > What does everyone think?
I think you have your hands completely full with in-tree filesystems, and opening the door to many new tests for out-of-tree filesystems could lead to Too Much Work. But simply adding the simple things in this patch to make generic tests work seems fairly harmless; it should be a one-shot deal, with no ongoing load. So from where I sit I don't see a big problem with a patch like this. Adding a lot of reiser4 specific tests is probably a different question, though. In theory it shouldn't be hard for out-of-tree filesystems to maintain their own tree of tests which could just drop in under tests/ right? -Eric >> Signed-off-by: Dushan Tcholich <[email protected]> >> >> --- xfstests.orig/common/rc 2014-12-14 15:17:59.000000000 +0100 >> +++ xfstests/common/rc 2014-12-15 19:40:36.000000000 +0100 >> @@ -622,7 +622,7 @@ >> xfs) >> def_blksz=`echo $MKFS_OPTIONS|sed -rn 's/.*-b ?size= ?+([0-9]+).*/\1/p'` >> ;; >> - ext2|ext3|ext4|ext4dev|udf|btrfs) >> + ext2|ext3|ext4|ext4dev|udf|btrfs|reiser4) >> def_blksz=`echo $MKFS_OPTIONS| sed -rn 's/.*-b ?+([0-9]+).*/\1/p'` >> ;; >> esac >> @@ -640,6 +640,7 @@ >> fi >> >> blocks=`expr $fssize / $blocksize` >> + fssizeK=`expr $fssize / 1024`K > > Is mkfs.resier4 really unable to take a byte or block size count for > the filesystem size? > >> >> if [ "$HOSTOS" == "Linux" ]; then >> devsize=`blockdev --getsize64 $SCRATCH_DEV` >> @@ -665,6 +666,9 @@ >> btrfs) >> $MKFS_BTRFS_PROG $MKFS_OPTIONS -b $fssize $SCRATCH_DEV >> ;; >> + reiser4) >> + ${MKFS_PROG}.$FSTYP $MKFS_OPTIONS -y -b $blocksize $SCRATCH_DEV >> $fssizeK >> + ;; > > You need to add support for MKFS_REISER4_PROG, etc. into > common/config > >> *) >> _notrun "Filesystem $FSTYP not supported in _scratch_mkfs_sized" >> ;; >> >> --- xfstests.orig/common/config 2014-12-14 15:17:59.000000000 +0100 >> +++ xfstests/common/config 2014-12-12 13:27:40.000000000 +0100 >> @@ -258,6 +256,9 @@ >> # acls & xattrs aren't turned on by default on reiserfs >> export MOUNT_OPTIONS="-o acl,user_xattr $REISERFS_MOUNT_OPTIONS" >> ;; >> + reiser4) >> + export MOUNT_OPTIONS=$REISER4_MOUNT_OPTIONS >> + ;; >> gfs2) >> # acls aren't turned on by default on gfs2 >> export MOUNT_OPTIONS="-o acl $GFS2_MOUNT_OPTIONS" >> @@ -302,6 +303,9 @@ >> reiserfs) >> export MKFS_OPTIONS="$REISERFS_MKFS_OPTIONS -q" >> ;; >> + reiser4) >> + export MKFS_OPTIONS=$REISER4_MKFS_OPTIONS >> + ;; > > whitespae damage. > >> gfs2) >> export MKFS_OPTIONS="$GFS2_MKFS_OPTIONS -O -p lock_nolock" >> ;; >> @@ -322,6 +326,9 @@ >> reiserfs) >> export FSCK_OPTIONS="--yes" >> ;; >> + reiser4) >> + export FSCK_OPTIONS="--yes" >> + ;; > > Whitespace damage. You could also just do: > > - reiserfs) > + reiser*) > > You also need to add the setup checks to the top of common/rc (i.e > after the "check for correct setup" comment). > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
