Re: fsx revisted

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 10:49 AM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 10:35 AM Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> fsx (tools/regression/fsx) is very useful at finding file system bugs.
>> I've used it to find several myself.  But it's always had one nagging
>> problem: because it's neither installed in the base system, nor
>> available from ports, it's difficult to use in CI pipelines.  I had
>> some free time around New Year's, so I fixed that problem.  I could've
>> just made a port for it, but instead I rewrote the whole thing.  The
>> rewrite is 100% compatible with the original (except for the -s
>> option, which I consider to be a bug), to the extent that identical
>> seed values will produce identical command sequences.  In the future,
>> though, I plan to add new features that will break that compatibility.
>> For example, fspacectl operations.
>>
>> Check it out if you've ever used the original.  I'd appreciate any
>> feedback, feature requests, etc.
>>
>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=268938
>
>
> I like this idea. I've not looked at the code yet, but love more tests.
>
> How hard would it be to integrate into ATF so we can run it as part of make test? ATF has the ability to skip tests when required packages aren't installed (which it does for python tests)...
>
> Warner

Easy.  I had that in mind when I did this.  We could add an atf-sh
test that creates a new ZFS file system and runs fsx on it for a fixed
number of operations.  Likewise for tmpfs, ufs, etc.