On 3/18/21 11:43 AM, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 11:23:13AM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
[...]
rescue=all working without panicing the machine,
and I verified everything by
using btrfs-corrupt-block to corrupt a dev root of a file system. Thanks,
We need to have such testing part of some suite but it depends on the
utilities that we don't want to ship by default. Last time we discussed
how to make btrfs-corrupt-block or similar available in source form in
fstests it was not pretty, like having half of the btrfs-progs sources
providing code to read and modify the data structures.
So, what if: we have such tests in the btrfs-progs testsuite. As they're
potentially dangerous, not run by default, but available for easy setup
and test in a VM. The testsuite can be exported into a tarball, with the
binaries included. Or simply run it built from git, that works too just
needs more dependencies installed.
I was thinking about collecting all the stress tests into one place,
fstests already has some but my idea is to provide stress testing of
btrfs-specific features, more at once. Or require some 3rd party tools
and data sources to provide the load.
It would be some infrastructure duplication with fstests, but lots of
that is already done in btrfs-progs and I'd rather go with some
duplication instead of development-time-only testing.
I actually had Boris working on this, basically allow us to set
BTRFS_CORRUPT_PROG inside our fstests config, and then allow us to write these
tests for fstests. I'd prefer to keep this inside xfstests for mostly selfish
reasons, it's easier for me to adapt the existing continual testing to take
advantage of this and automatically run the xfstests stuff and post the results.
If we keep it in btrfs-progs I have to write a bunch of code to run those to
post the results to our continual testing stuff. Thanks,
Josef
