Hi Toscano
在 2015年06月05日 00:37, Pino Toscano 写道:
Hi,
In data giovedì 4 giugno 2015 11:56:41, Pino Tsao ha scritto:
Disable the test case temporarily for 2 reasons:
1. Because the default test disk size is 500M, while btrfs
convert command think it is too small to convert it(actually,
just add 10M or 20M more is enough).
If the base test disks that are available in tests/c-api/tests are
not enough, just write the test (creating handle, scratch disks,
partitions, etc) in shell or perl, just like the other ones available
in tests/btrfs.
This kind of API needs at least some basic coverage.
Ok, I can do that. But actually, I think the following 2nd problem
matters more, I mean, even if I write the test, but it will still fail
,because of the tiny problem of btrfs-convert
2. Btrfs-progs has may have a tiny bug, when execute the command
in guestfish, it report some error, but convert the filesystem to
btrfs successfully.
I don't understand, are you saying that `btrfs convert` will exit with
failure but doing the actual changes? If so, is that a known/reported
upstream bug?
Yes, exactly, it exit with failure but actually got what we want:
convert fs from ext2/3/4 to btrfs successfully. While it can rollback
normally without any error. I did the test in guestfish using a img
file, and I also checked the result by examining img file outside the
guestfish, prove that the API worked.
I searched in the btrfs mail list archive, did`t see it is a known bug.
because the btrfs convert command works well in my host. It just has
that problem in supermin appliance for me for now.
I will keep following this problem, with my colleague, who is a
contributor of btrfs-progs
Signed-off-by: Pino Tsao <[email protected]>
---
daemon/btrfs.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
generator/actions.ml | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
diff --git a/daemon/btrfs.c b/daemon/btrfs.c
index 39392f7..fd679cf 100644
--- a/daemon/btrfs.c
+++ b/daemon/btrfs.c
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ GUESTFSD_EXT_CMD(str_btrfsck, btrfsck);
GUESTFSD_EXT_CMD(str_mkfs_btrfs, mkfs.btrfs);
GUESTFSD_EXT_CMD(str_umount, umount);
GUESTFSD_EXT_CMD(str_btrfsimage, btrfs-image);
+GUESTFSD_EXT_CMD(str_btrfsconvert, btrfs-convert);
int
optgroup_btrfs_available (void)
@@ -2083,3 +2084,31 @@ do_btrfs_image (char *const *sources, const char *image,
return 0;
}
+
+int
+do_btrfs_convert (const char *device, int rollback)
+{
+ const size_t MAX_ARGS = 64;
+ const char *argv[MAX_ARGS];
+ size_t i = 0;
+ CLEANUP_FREE char *err = NULL;
+ CLEANUP_FREE char *out = NULL;
+ int r;
+
+ ADD_ARG (argv, i, str_btrfsconvert);
+ ADD_ARG (argv, i, device);
+
+ if ((optargs_bitmask & GUESTFS_BTRFS_CONVERT_ROLLBACK_BITMASK) && rollback)
+ ADD_ARG (argv, i, "-r");
+
+ ADD_ARG (argv, i, NULL);
+
+ r = commandv (&out, &err, argv);
+ if (r == -1) {
+ reply_with_error ("%s: %s", device, err);
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
"out" seems not used, so no need to collect it from commandv.
affirmative.
diff --git a/generator/actions.ml b/generator/actions.ml
index 1a89869..e42f02d 100644
--- a/generator/actions.ml
+++ b/generator/actions.ml
@@ -12579,6 +12579,24 @@ numbered C<partnum> on device C<device>.
It returns C<primary>, C<logical>, or C<extended>." };
+ { defaults with
+ name = "btrfs_convert";
+ style = RErr, [Device "device"], [OBool "rollback"];
+ proc_nr = Some 455;
+ optional = Some "btrfs"; camel_name = "BTRFSConvert";
+ tests = [
+ InitEmpty, Disabled, TestRun (
+ [["mkfs"; "ext2"; "/dev/sda"; ""; "NOARG"; ""; ""; "NOARG"];
+ ["btrfs_convert"; "/dev/sda"; ""];
+ ["btrfs_convert"; "/dev/sda"; "true"]]), []
+ ];
^ extra white spaces at the end
affirmative.
+ shortdesc = "convert from ext2/3/4 filesystem to btrfs or rollback";
+ longdesc = "\
+This is used to convert existed ext2/3/4 to btrfs filesystem, and the original
+filesystem image is accessible as from separate subvolume named ext2_saved as
file image.
While I understand you copied this description from the btrfs-convert(1)
man page, please at least make sure it is proper grammar:
This is used to convert an existing ext2/3/4 filesystem to btrfs;
a copy of the original filesystem image is still available in a
separate subvolume named "ext2_saved".
affirmative.
Is it still correct?
If the upstream documentation is still incorrect, please report the
mistakes so it can be fixed there.
I am not sure what correct you are talking about. I use the latest
btrfs-progs(4.0.1), and I check it with "btrfs subvolume list <path>":
ID 256 gen 13 top level 5 path ext2_saved
the orginal filesystem is accessible as a file named "image" in dir
named "ext2_save", where the subvolue mount
Thanks,
--
Yours Sincerely,
Pino Tsao
_______________________________________________
Libguestfs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
