On Thu, Jan 05 2017 at 1:24pm -0500, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Upstream now has better xfs error handling configurability. Have you > tested with that? (for that matter, what thinp test framework exists > on the lvm2/dm side? We currently have only minimal testing fstests, > to be honest. Until we have a framework to test against this seems likely > to continue going in theoretical circles.) device-mapper-test-suite (dmts) has various thinp out of space tests, e.g.: # dmtest run --suite thin-provisioning -n /out_of_*space/ Loaded suite thin-provisioning DeletionTests delete_after_out_of_space...PASS DiscardSlowTests discard_after_out_of_space...PASS # dmtest run --suite thin-provisioning -t PoolResizeWhenOutOfSpaceTests Loaded suite thin-provisioning PoolResizeWhenOutOfSpaceTests io_to_provisioned_region_with_OODS_held_io...PASS out_of_data_space_errors_immediately_if_requested...PASS out_of_data_space_times_out...PASS resize_after_OODS_error_immediately...PASS resize_after_OODS_held_io...PASS resize_after_OODS_held_io_ext4...#<Test::Unit::Error:0x00000003746d48 @exception= #<ProcessControl::ExitError: command failed: fsck.ext4 -fn /dev/mapper/test-dev-60498>, @test_name= "test_resize_after_OODS_held_io_ext4(PoolResizeWhenOutOfSpaceTests)"> FAIL resize_after_OODS_held_io_preload...PASS resize_after_OODS_held_io_timed_out_preload...PASS resize_io...PASS I need to look closer at the 'resize_after_OODS_held_io_ext4' FAIL, after initial look the dmts test code seems to be buggy. But we can easily extend to have specific coverage with XFS ontop. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
