[PATCH v2 3/6] tests: Test wrong sector size with 4k storage

[Nir Soffer]

When using 4k disk and sector=512, we expect sanlock to fail with
SanlockException(EINVAL) when writing or reading.

Two tests are marked as expected failure (xfail):
- write_resource() - not sure how sanlock can succeed with wrong sector
  size - this may be a bug.
- read_resource_owners() - sanlock uses a fallback mechanism, hiding
  wrong value from the user. I think we can make sanlock more strict.

Signed-off-by: Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com&gt;
---
 tests/python_test.py | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tests/python_test.py b/tests/python_test.py
index 0681570..72e3a1d 100644
--- a/tests/python_test.py
+++ b/tests/python_test.py
@@ -94,10 +94,26 @@ def test_write_lockspace_4k(user_4k_path, sanlock_daemon, align):
 
     # Check that sanlock did not write beyond the lockspace area.
     util.check_guard(user_4k_path, align)
 
 
+def test_write_lockspace_4k_invalid_sector_size(sanlock_daemon, user_4k_path):
+    with pytest.raises(sanlock.SanlockException) as e:
+        sanlock.write_lockspace(
+            "name", user_4k_path, iotimeout=1, sector=SECTOR_SIZE_512)
+    assert e.value.errno == errno.EINVAL
+
+
+def test_read_lockspace_4k_invalid_sector_size(sanlock_daemon, user_4k_path):
+    sanlock.write_lockspace(
+        "name", user_4k_path, iotimeout=1, sector=SECTOR_SIZE_4K)
+
+    with pytest.raises(sanlock.SanlockException) as e:
+        sanlock.read_lockspace(user_4k_path, sector=SECTOR_SIZE_512)
+    assert e.value.errno == errno.EINVAL
+
+
 @pytest.mark.parametrize("size,offset", [
     # Smallest offset.
     (MIN_RES_SIZE, 0),
     # Large offset.
     (LARGE_FILE_SIZE, LARGE_FILE_SIZE - MIN_RES_SIZE),
@@ -176,10 +192,53 @@ def test_write_resource_4k(sanlock_daemon, user_4k_path, align):
 
     # Check that sanlock did not write beyond the lockspace area.
     util.check_guard(user_4k_path, align)
 
 
+(a)pytest.mark.xfail(reason=&quot;need to investigate why the call succeed")
+def test_write_resource_4k_invalid_sector_size(sanlock_daemon, user_4k_path):
+    disks = [(user_4k_path, 0)]
+
+    with pytest.raises(sanlock.SanlockException) as e:
+        sanlock.write_resource(
+            "ls_name", "res_name", disks, sector=SECTOR_SIZE_512)
+    assert e.value.errno == errno.EINVAL
+
+
+def test_read_resource_4k_invalid_sector_size(sanlock_daemon, user_4k_path):
+    disks = [(user_4k_path, 0)]
+
+    sanlock.write_resource(
+        "ls_name",
+        "res_name",
+        disks,
+        align=ALIGNMENT_1M,
+        sector=SECTOR_SIZE_4K)
+
+    with pytest.raises(sanlock.SanlockException) as e:
+        sanlock.read_resource(user_4k_path, sector=SECTOR_SIZE_512)
+    assert e.value.errno == errno.EINVAL
+
+
+(a)pytest.mark.xfail(reason=&quot;fallback hides wrong value from caller")
+def test_read_resource_owners_4k_invalid_sector_size(
+        sanlock_daemon, user_4k_path):
+    disks = [(user_4k_path, 0)]
+
+    sanlock.write_resource(
+        "ls_name",
+        "res_name",
+        disks,
+        align=ALIGNMENT_1M,
+        sector=SECTOR_SIZE_4K)
+
+    with pytest.raises(sanlock.SanlockException) as e:
+        sanlock.read_resource_owners(
+            "ls_name", "res_name", disks, sector=SECTOR_SIZE_512)
+    assert e.value.errno == errno.EINVAL
+
+
 @pytest.mark.parametrize("size,offset", [
     # Smallest offset.
     (MIN_RES_SIZE, 0),
     # Large offset.
     (LARGE_FILE_SIZE, LARGE_FILE_SIZE - MIN_RES_SIZE),
-- 
2.17.2