On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 07:24:37PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > I suspect our current generic fsstress and fsx tests would catch this > already, and what I need to do is to make sure I add ext3/1k to my > test configurations (currently I test an ext3 configuration, and a 1k > block configuration, but I don't currently test ext3/1k together). > That would probably round out my full test iteration to a very > pleasing 24 hours or so, which is fine, although I wouldn't want it to > take much longer than that. > Actually, this issue isn't specific to 1k blocks, so I wouldn't count on it :) That block size in my tests is an artifact of the initial reproducer Lukas had (generic/270 on ext3 with 1k blocks). It just so happens that the start/len arguments fsstress chooses for punch hole operations in that setup straddles the indirect tree levels in the wrong ways. On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 03:58:06PM +0100, Lukáš Czerner wrote: > Omar, can you make the test generic and can this be reproduced on 4k > block size ? If not, can you make a generic reproducer which does > not depend on the block size ? > > Also if we want to include the special case for ext4, we need to > have a function which allows us to alter the mkfs options without > completely overriding the user specified options. I think that there > is something like that for xfs, Omar can you do that for ext4 as > well ? > > Thanks! > -Lukas > > No problem, I'll have a go at it. On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 09:07:19AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > It's built into the _scratch_mkfs_xfs wrapper, where if the test > supplies extra options and that conflicts with the CLI supplied > options it drops the CLI specific options and just uses the test > options. > > I've mentioned this specificly in the past, too. i.e. that all > _scratch_mkfs_$FSTYP wrappers should be handling CLI vs test > specific options like this.... :/ > > Cheers, > > Dave. > I'll take that into account. Thanks, everyone! -- Omar -- 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
