From patchwork Mon Feb 27 05:07:59 2017 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Zorro Lang X-Patchwork-Id: 9592743 Return-Path: Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.125]) by pdx-korg-patchwork.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E09CF60471 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:31:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2A042808F for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:31:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix, from userid 486) id C57C828354; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:31:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on pdx-wl-mail.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=2.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.wl.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797B92808F for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:31:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751030AbdB0FbS (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 00:31:18 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37854 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751010AbdB0FbR (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 00:31:17 -0500 Received: from int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CDEE7F368 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain.com (ovpn-8-36.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.8.36]) by int-mx14.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v1R584dp028628; Mon, 27 Feb 2017 00:08:05 -0500 From: Zorro Lang To: fstests@vger.kernel.org Cc: zlang@redhat.com Subject: [PATCH] common/xfs: change _xfs_mkfs_validation_check return logic Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:07:59 +0800 Message-Id: <1488172079-7170-1-git-send-email-zlang@redhat.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.27 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Mon, 27 Feb 2017 05:08:07 +0000 (UTC) Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP _xfs_mkfs_validation_check() try to make sure mkfs.xfs the stricter input checks. It runs two test command lines with illegal parameters: $cmd -s size=2s $cmd -l version=2,su=260k The current logic think if both of them return 0 (can't find illegal input), then it means the current xfsprogs doesn't support the stricter input checks. But when test on machine with 4k sector size disk, the first command will return non-zero, and then _xfs_mkfs_validation_check() return non-zero to _require_xfs_mkfs_validation(). The latter will assume xfsprogs support the stricter input checks. So I think the proper logic should be if "any" of test command lines return 0, then it means xfsprogs can't do stricter input test. Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang --- common/xfs | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/common/xfs b/common/xfs index 767a481..0eaa974 100644 --- a/common/xfs +++ b/common/xfs @@ -546,7 +546,7 @@ _xfs_mkfs_validation_check() local sum=$? $cmd -l version=2,su=260k >/dev/null 2>&1 - sum=`expr $sum + $?` + sum=`expr $sum \* $?` rm -f $tmpfile return $sum