Re: Ext4 Punch Hole Support: Change summary and test case summary

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2011-04-19, at 1:37 AM, Allison Henderson wrote:
> Big Hole Test
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> A hole large hole is punched in a large file (exact file size=638169088 bytes, exact hole size = 638150422 bytes, offset = 6144 bytes), 
> resulting in all but 5 blocks being punched out (2 in the front, 3 in the back).  This test case verifies that the code can properly
> punch out a hole covering multiple extents.
> 
> This test is successful when the following conditions are met:
> - File frag shows extents only for the first two blocks and the last 3 blocks
> - The test file contains zeros from bytes 6144 to 638156566
> (* ls and df is not measured here because some blocks will still be reserved
> as index blocks causing the consumed space to be appear larger)

Shouldn't the remaining two extents fit inside the inode, so there is no need for index blocks, or does the extent removal code not shrink the index blocks?

Cheers, Andreas





--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux