Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 14 Jun 2023 13:27:08 +0200
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
To:     Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@wdc.com>
Cc:     "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>,
        Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro@fastmail.com>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v1] nvme/040: Free loop back resources
Message-ID: <pzgf2abc2piophrwt3m3elaeb3vrrgrvxyq437ytpmah6rnxf5@m4gfyw4bcmxo>
References: <20230612142945.10969-1-dwagner@suse.de>
 <bsbx3i3ut32zbatwrpn3t2vjbjdmttqul2jt7opd3s4mipo6pj@5ojtsv7aunbn>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bsbx3i3ut32zbatwrpn3t2vjbjdmttqul2jt7opd3s4mipo6pj@5ojtsv7aunbn>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 11:13:18AM +0000, Shinichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> On Jun 12, 2023 / 16:29, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> > The tests does not cleanup all resources after it has finished. This
> > leads to rm not being able to remove the TMPDIR cleanly:
> > 
> >   + rm -rf blktests/results/tmpdir.nvme.040.m2J
> >   rm: cannot remove 'blktests/results/tmpdir.nvme.040.m2J': Directory not empty
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@suse.de>
> 
> Hi Daniel, thanks for the patch. It looks good to me. Now the test case leaves a
> loop device. This patch avoids it. Good.
> 
> Question, I do not observe the rm command failure in my test environments. Do
> you have insight why you were able to find the failure?

I am running the tests inside a VM and I am sharing a part of my host filesystem
via NFS which contain the blktests. If I understood it correctly, the NFS server
is behaving slightly differently here. I can't observe it either with xfs or
btrfs.