On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:13:56AM +0100, Filipe Manana wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 03:23:35AM +0100, fdmanana@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Test that a filesystem's implementation of the stat(2) system call > >> reports correct values for the number of blocks allocated for a file > >> when there are delayed allocations. > >> > >> This test is motivated by a bug in btrfs which is fixed by the following > >> path for the linux kernel: > >> > >> "Btrfs: fix reported number of inode blocks" > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx> ... > > > >> +_require_xfs_io_command "falloc" > > > > This has some problems with the "-k" flag. NFSv4.2 supports fallocate(2) > > but not KEEP_SIZE flag, so test fails with NFSv4.2 mount. > > > > XXX Bytes, X ops; XX:XX:XX.X (XXX YYY/sec and XXX ops/sec) > > +fallocate: Operation not supported > > wrote 65536/65536 bytes at offset 0 > > > > We met the same issue before with generic/071. > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/fstests/msg03527.html > > > > So I have two options now, one is the method proposed by Eric in above > > thread, run falloc command with $param. > > > > common/rc::_require_xfs_io_command > > - testio=`$XFS_IO_PROG -F -f -c "falloc 0 1m" $testfile 2>&1` > > + testio=`$XFS_IO_PROG -F -f -c "falloc $param 0 1m" $testfile 2>&1` > > > > tests/generic/422: > > -_require_xfs_io_command "falloc" > > +_require_xfs_io_command "falloc" "-k" > > > > > > The other is requiring "falloc -k" in the test: > > > > common/rc::_require_xfs_io_command > > - "falloc" ) > > - testio=`$XFS_IO_PROG -F -f -c "falloc 0 1m" $testfile 2>&1` > > + falloc* ) > > + testio=`$XFS_IO_PROG -F -f -c "$command 0 1m" $testfile 2>&1` > > > > tests/generic/422: > > -_require_xfs_io_command "falloc" > > +_require_xfs_io_command "falloc -k" > > > > I slightly prefer the second way, as it doesn't change the default > > behavior and makes falloc a special-case. > > (_require_xfs_io_command "<cmd>" "<param>" behaves the same as other > > commands). > > Ok, do you prefer the changes to common/rc in a separate patch or can > they be folded in v2 for this test? A separate patch would be good, as it fixes a separate & long standing issue. Thanks! Eryu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
