On 01/18/2012 12:03 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 1/17/12 8:42 PM, Liu Bo wrote:
>> On 01/05/2012 04:54 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> Ok, this is a significant rework of 275, which made too many
>>> assumptions about details of space usage and failed on several
>>> filesystems (it passed on xfs, but only by accident).
>>>
>>> This new version tries to leave about 256k free, then tries
>>> a single 1M IO, and fails only if 0 bytes are written.
>>>
>>> It also sends a lot more to $seq.full for debugging on failure
>>> and fixes a few other stylistic things.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> diff --git a/275 b/275
>>> index 214262e..8f521f8 100755
>>> --- a/275
>>> +++ b/275
>>> @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
>>> #! /bin/bash
>>> # FS QA Test No. 275
>>> #
>>> -# The posix write test. when write size is larger than disk free size,
>>> -# should write as more as possible
>>> +# The posix write test. When write size is larger than disk free size,
>>> +# should write as much as possible until ENOSPC.
>>> #
>>> #-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> # Copyright (c) 2011-2012 Fujitsu, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
>>> @@ -30,13 +30,12 @@ echo "QA output created by $seq"
>>>
>>> here=`pwd`
>>> tmp=/tmp/$$
>>> -status=0 # success is the default!
>>> +status=1 # failure is the default!
>>> trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
>>>
>>> _cleanup()
>>> {
>>> cd /
>>> - rm -f $SCRATCH_MNT/* $tmp.*
>>> _scratch_unmount
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -49,7 +48,7 @@ _supported_os IRIX Linux
>>> _require_scratch
>>>
>>> echo "------------------------------"
>>> -echo "write lack test"
>>> +echo "write until ENOSPC test"
>>> echo "------------------------------"
>>>
>>> rm -f $seq.full
>>> @@ -59,31 +58,38 @@ _scratch_mkfs_sized $((1 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024)) >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> _scratch_mount
>>>
>>> rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/*
>>> -cd $SCRATCH_MNT
>>>
>>> -dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp1 bs=4K count=1 >/dev/null 2>&1
>>> -if [ $? -ne 0 ]
>>> -then
>>> - echo "create file err"
>>> - status=1
>>> - exit
>>> -fi
>>> +dd if=/dev/zero of=$SCRATCH_MNT/tmp1 bs=256K count=1 >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> +[ $? -ne 0 ] && _fail "Error creating file"
>>>
>>> -dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp2 bs=1M >/dev/null 2>&1
>>> -dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp3 bs=4K >/dev/null 2>&1
>>> +# Attempt to completely fill fs
>>> +dd if=/dev/zero of=$SCRATCH_MNT/tmp2 bs=1M >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> sync
>>> +dd if=/dev/zero of=$SCRATCH_MNT/tmp3 bs=4K >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> +sync
>>> +# Last effort, use O_SYNC
>>> +dd if=/dev/zero of=$SCRATCH_MNT/tmp4 bs=4K oflag=sync >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> +# Save space usage info to the full file
>>> +echo "Pre rm space:" >> $seq.full
>>> +df $SCRATCH_MNT >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>>
>>> -rm -f tmp1
>>> +# Should leave approx 256k free
>>> +rm -f $SCRATCH_MNT/tmp1
>>> sync
>>> +echo "Post rm space:" >> $seq.full
>>> +df $SCRATCH_MNT >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> +_freespace=`df -k $SCRATCH_MNT | tail -n 1 | awk '{print $4}'`
>>> +[ $_freespace -gt 1024 ] && _fail "could not sufficiently fill filesystem"
>>> +
>> I doubt this cause btrfs has a mixed data+meta mode, which means data and metadata can
>> share space, but this mode is only enabled when the filesystem size is less than 1G.
>>
>> We can apply the below to avoid it:
>> -_scratch_mkfs_sized $((1 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024)) >>$seq.full 2>&1
>> +_scratch_mkfs_sized $((2 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024)) >>$seq.full 2>&1
>
> Ok, I can do that easily enough (assuming scratch space is likely to be at least 2G...)
>
>>> +# Try a write larger than available space
>>> +dd if=/dev/zero of=$SCRATCH_MNT/tmp1 bs=1M count=1 >>$seq.full 2>&1
>>> +echo "Bytes written until ENOSPC:" >>$seq.full
>>> +du $SCRATCH_MNT/tmp1 >>$seq.full
>>>
>>> -dd if=/dev/zero of=tmp1 bs=8K count=1 >/dev/null 2>&1
>>> -_filesize=`du tmp1 | awk '{print $1}'`
>>> -if [ $_filesize -ne 4 ]
>>> -then
>>> - echo "write file err"
>>> - status=1
>>> - exit
>>> -fi
>>> +# And at least some of it should succeed.
>>> +_filesize=`du $SCRATCH_MNT/tmp1 | awk '{print $1}'`
>>> +[ $_filesize -eq 0 ] && _fail "write file err: Partial write until enospc failed; wrote 0 bytes."
>>>
>> And btrfs will check free space first and then decide if it should allocate blocks, so a partial write
>> will fail anyway.
>
> Ok, I'm not quite clear - will the above be a problem for btrfs or is it ok?
>
It is ok since it depends on the underlying FS IMO.
thanks,
liubo
> Thanks,
> -Eric
>
>> Other parts looks good to me :)
>>
>> thanks,
>> liubo
>>
>>> echo "done"
>>> +status=0
>>> exit
>>> diff --git a/275.out b/275.out
>>> index 30af43c..69b9d52 100644
>>> --- a/275.out
>>> +++ b/275.out
>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>>> QA output created by 275
>>> ------------------------------
>>> -write lack test
>>> +write until ENOSPC test
>>> ------------------------------
>>> done
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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
