On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 11:41:39AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > Hi Ted, > > > > I haven't yet looked at whether it is kernel or e2fsck bug. > > But I am having this with the latest patch queue when running > > fsstress. The fsstress have falloc added as a supported operation. > > So it is mostly to do with fallocate. Architecture is x86. > > > > The tests performed are > > > > chown 3/39 write op > > creat 4/39 write op > > dread 4/39 > > fdatasync 1/39 write op > > fsync 1/39 write op > > getdents 1/39 > > link 1/39 write op > > mkdir 2/39 write op > > mknod 2/39 write op > > read 1/39 > > readlink 1/39 > > rename 2/39 write op > > rmdir 1/39 write op > > stat 1/39 > > symlink 2/39 write op > > sync 1/39 > > truncate 2/39 write op > > unlink 1/39 write op > > write 4/39 write op > > fallocate 4/39 write op > > > > seed = 1218256896 > > > > > > /usr/local/e2fsprogs/sbin/e2fsck -fnv /dev/sdb1 > > e2fsck 1.41.0 (10-Jul-2008) > > Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes > > Inode 10093, i_size is 974599, should be 999424. Fix? no > > are those due to blocks beyond EOF, I assume? How is fallocate being > called in fsstress? > lr = ((__int64_t)random() << 32) + random(); off = (off64_t)(lr % MIN(stb.st_size + (1024 * 1024), MAXFSIZE)); off %= maxfsize; len = (random() % (getpagesize() * 32)) + 1; #ifdef __i386__ #define __NR_fallocate 324 e = syscall(__NR_fallocate, fd, 0, off, len) < 0 ? errno : 0; #elif defined (__powerpc__) #define __NR_fallocate 309 e = syscall(__NR_fallocate, fd, 0, 0, (unsigned int)off, 0, (unsigned int) len) < 0 ? errno : 0; #elif defined (__x86_64__) #define __NR_fallocate 285 e = syscall(__NR_fallocate, fd, 0, off, len) < 0 ? errno : 0; #endif -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
