On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 09:16:39PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Sun, Nov 24, 2024 at 09:14:43PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 08:52:48AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > +# with ENOSPC for example. However, XFS will sometimes run out of space. > > > +_reflink $SCRATCH_MNT/bar $SCRATCH_MNT/foo >>$seqres.full 2> $tmp.err > > > +cat $tmp.err > > > +test "$FSTYP" = "xfs" && grep -q 'No space left on device' $tmp.err && \ > > > + _notrun "ran out of space while cloning" > > > > Should this simply be unconditional instead of depend on XFS? > > Felipe said no: > https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/CAL3q7H5KjvXsXzt4n0XP1FTUt=A5cKom7p+dGD6GG-iL7CyDXQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Hmm. Being able to totally fill the fs without ENOSPC seems odd. Maybe we need to figure out a way to scale down the size for the generic test and have a separate one for the XFS ENOSPC case? Not a huge fan of that, but the current version also seems odd.
