Hi Luís, It looks like this one is still in need of review... On Wed, 27 Apr 2022 15:34:09 +0100, Luís Henriques wrote: > When using a directory with 'max_bytes' quota as a base for a mount, > statfs shall use that 'max_bytes' value as the total disk size. That > value shall be used even when using subdirectory as base for the mount. > > A bug was found where, when this subdirectory also had a 'max_files' > quota, the real filesystem size would be returned instead of the parent > 'max_bytes' quota value. This test case verifies this bug is fixed. > > Signed-off-by: Luís Henriques <lhenriques@xxxxxxx> > --- > tests/ceph/005 | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tests/ceph/005.out | 2 ++ > 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+) > create mode 100755 tests/ceph/005 > create mode 100644 tests/ceph/005.out > > diff --git a/tests/ceph/005 b/tests/ceph/005 > new file mode 100755 > index 000000000000..0763a235a677 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tests/ceph/005 > @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ > +#! /bin/bash > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +# Copyright (C) 2022 SUSE Linux Products GmbH. All Rights Reserved. > +# > +# FS QA Test 005 > +# > +# Make sure statfs reports correct total size when: > +# 1. using a directory with 'max_byte' quota as base for a mount > +# 2. using a subdirectory of the above directory with 'max_files' quota > +# > +. ./common/preamble > +_begin_fstest auto quick quota > + > +_supported_fs generic > +_require_scratch > + > +_scratch_mount > +mkdir -p $SCRATCH_MNT/quota-dir/subdir > + > +# set quotas > +quota=$((1024*10000)) > +$SETFATTR_PROG -n ceph.quota.max_bytes -v $quota $SCRATCH_MNT/quota-dir > +$SETFATTR_PROG -n ceph.quota.max_files -v $quota $SCRATCH_MNT/quota-dir/subdir > +_scratch_unmount > + > +SCRATCH_DEV=$SCRATCH_DEV/quota-dir _scratch_mount Aside from the standard please-quote-your-variables gripe, I'm a little confused with the use of SCRATCH_DEV for this test. Network FSes where mkfs isn't provided don't generally use it. Is there any way that this could be run against TEST_DEV, or does the umount / mount complicate things too much? Cheers, David
