On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 8:41 AM Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> There is a regression in recent v6.4 cycle where a scrub rewrite changed
> how we report errors, especially repairable errors.
>
> Before the rewrite, we report the initial errors hit, and the amount of
> repairable errors.
> While after the rewrite, we no longer report the initial errors, but
> only the number of repairable errors.
>
> This behavior change is a regression, thus needs a test case to prevent
> such problem from happening again.
>
> The test case itself would:
>
> - Create a btrfs using DUP data profile and 4K sector size
>
> - Create a file with one 128K extent
>
> - Corrupt the first mirror of that 128K extent
>
> - Scrub and checks the detailed report
> Both corrected errors and csum errors should be 32.
>
> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/btrfs/289 | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tests/btrfs/289.out | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 69 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/289
> create mode 100644 tests/btrfs/289.out
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/289 b/tests/btrfs/289
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000..914b6280
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/289
> @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# Copyright (C) 2023 SUSE Linux Products GmbH. All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test 289
> +#
> +# Make sure btrfs-scrub reports errors correctly for repaired sectors.
> +#
> +. ./common/preamble
> +_begin_fstest auto quick scrub repair
> +
> +# For filedefrag and all the filters
So almost the same comment as in the other test:
This comment is a bit confusing. File defrag? The test doesn't exercise defrag.
I'm not seeing the test using filters either, the test is redirecting
xfs_io's stdout to /dev/null
> +. ./common/filter
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +
> +# Modify as appropriate.
> +_supported_fs btrfs
> +_require_scratch
> +
> +_require_odirect
> +# Overwriting data is forbidden on a zoned block device
> +_require_non_zoned_device "${SCRATCH_DEV}"
> +
> +# The errors reported would be in the unit of sector, thus the number
> +# is dependent on the sectorsize.
> +_require_btrfs_support_sectorsize 4096
So same as before, can we please get a _fixed_by_kernel_commit to
identify the patch that fixes the regression?
> +
> +# Create a single btrfs with DUP data profile, and create one 128K file.
> +_scratch_mkfs -s 4k -d dup -b 1G >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +_scratch_mount
> +$XFS_IO_PROG -f -d -c "pwrite -S 0xaa -b 128K 0 128K" "$SCRATCH_MNT/foobar" \
> + > /dev/null
> +sync
> +
> +logical=$(_btrfs_get_first_logical "$SCRATCH_MNT/foobar")
> +
> +physical1=$(_btrfs_get_physical ${logical} 1)
> +devpath1=$(_btrfs_get_device_path ${logical} 1)
> +_scratch_unmount
> +
> +echo " corrupt stripe #1, devpath $devpath1 physical $physical1" \
> + >> $seqres.full
> +$XFS_IO_PROG -d -c "pwrite -S 0xf1 -b 64K $physical1 128K" $devpath1 \
> + > /dev/null
> +
> +# Mount and do a scrub and compare the ouput
ouput -> output
> +_scratch_mount
> +$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG scrub start -BR $SCRATCH_MNT >> $tmp.scrub_report 2>&1
> +cat $tmp.scrub_report >> $seqres.full
> +
> +# Csum errors should be 128K/4K = 32
> +csum_errors=$(grep "csum_errors" $tmp.scrub_report | awk '{print $2}')
Use $AWK_PROG instead.
> +if [ $csum_errors -ne 32 ]; then
> + echo "csum_errors incorrect, expect 32 has $csum_errors"
> +fi
> +
> +# And all errors should be repaired, thus corrected errors should also be 32.
> +corrected_errors=$(grep "corrected_errors" $tmp.scrub_report | awk '{print $2}')
Same here, $AWK_PROG instead.
Otherwise, it looks fine, thanks.
> +if [ $corrected_errors -ne 32 ]; then
> + echo "csum_errors incorrect, expect 32 has $corrected_errors"
> +fi
> +
> +echo "Silence is golden"
> +
> +status=0
> +exit
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/289.out b/tests/btrfs/289.out
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..7d3b7f80
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/289.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +QA output created by 289
> +Silence is golden
> --
> 2.39.0
>
