On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 04:07:20PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > Hmm. Well my initial thought was that the snapshot could fall back to > buffered copies of file1 so that we wouldn't abort the test well before > actually filling up the filesystem. Btw, can we please stop sing snaphot in the test description for reflink copies? That's a really confusing term to use in this context.. > But you're right that my solution smells off -- we want to test reflink > dealing with ENOSPC. Perhaps the right thing to do is to truncate and > rewrite file1 after a _cp_reflink fails, so that the next time through > the loop we'll be reflinking extents from a (probably less full) AG. That does sound better.
