| Message ID | 20181010233441.5337-4-amir73il@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Tests for readahead() and fadvise() on overlayfs | expand |
Hi! > There is no reason to continue the test if readahead syscall fails > and we can also check and report TCONF if filesystem does not support > readahead. This looks good, but I would like to get rid of the check_ret function as I said in the first case. So maybe we can leave it in the cleanup but move the actuall code in this patch. Does that sounds good to you? > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > --- > .../kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c | 21 +++++++++++-------- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c > index c739d3ba2..f77e7c66c 100644 > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c > @@ -45,16 +45,17 @@ static struct tst_option options[] = { > {NULL, NULL, NULL} > }; > > -static int check_ret(long expected_ret) > +static int check_ret(void) > { > - if (expected_ret == TST_RET) { > - tst_res(TPASS, "expected ret success - " > - "returned value = %ld", TST_RET); > + if (TST_RET == 0) > return 0; > + if (TST_ERR == EINVAL) { > + tst_res(TCONF, "readahead not supported on %s", > + tst_device->fs_type); > + } else { > + tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "readahead failed on %s", > + tst_device->fs_type); > } > - tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "unexpected failure - " > - "returned value = %ld, expected: %ld", > - TST_RET, expected_ret); > return 1; > } > > @@ -163,8 +164,8 @@ static void read_testfile(int do_readahead, const char *fname, size_t fsize, > do { > TEST(readahead(fd, offset, fsize - offset)); > if (TST_RET != 0) { > - check_ret(0); > - break; > + SAFE_CLOSE(fd); > + return; > } > > /* estimate max readahead size based on first call */ > @@ -252,6 +253,8 @@ static void test_readahead(void) > tst_res(TINFO, "read_testfile(1)"); > read_testfile(1, testfile, testfile_size, &read_bytes_ra, > &usec_ra, &cached_ra); > + if (check_ret()) > + return; > if (cached_ra > cached_low) > cached_ra = cached_ra - cached_low; > else > -- > 2.17.1 >
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:32 PM Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> wrote: > > Hi! > > There is no reason to continue the test if readahead syscall fails > > and we can also check and report TCONF if filesystem does not support > > readahead. > > This looks good, but I would like to get rid of the check_ret function > as I said in the first case. > > So maybe we can leave it in the cleanup but move the actuall code in > this patch. Does that sounds good to you? Will do. Thanks, Amir.
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c index c739d3ba2..f77e7c66c 100644 --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c @@ -45,16 +45,17 @@ static struct tst_option options[] = { {NULL, NULL, NULL} }; -static int check_ret(long expected_ret) +static int check_ret(void) { - if (expected_ret == TST_RET) { - tst_res(TPASS, "expected ret success - " - "returned value = %ld", TST_RET); + if (TST_RET == 0) return 0; + if (TST_ERR == EINVAL) { + tst_res(TCONF, "readahead not supported on %s", + tst_device->fs_type); + } else { + tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "readahead failed on %s", + tst_device->fs_type); } - tst_res(TFAIL | TTERRNO, "unexpected failure - " - "returned value = %ld, expected: %ld", - TST_RET, expected_ret); return 1; } @@ -163,8 +164,8 @@ static void read_testfile(int do_readahead, const char *fname, size_t fsize, do { TEST(readahead(fd, offset, fsize - offset)); if (TST_RET != 0) { - check_ret(0); - break; + SAFE_CLOSE(fd); + return; } /* estimate max readahead size based on first call */ @@ -252,6 +253,8 @@ static void test_readahead(void) tst_res(TINFO, "read_testfile(1)"); read_testfile(1, testfile, testfile_size, &read_bytes_ra, &usec_ra, &cached_ra); + if (check_ret()) + return; if (cached_ra > cached_low) cached_ra = cached_ra - cached_low; else
There is no reason to continue the test if readahead syscall fails and we can also check and report TCONF if filesystem does not support readahead. Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> --- .../kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead02.c | 21 +++++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)