On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 10:07:39AM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> If you could work out how to fix the test to catch the bug in kvm-xfstests >> that would be nice. > > One question, how did you actually test it using kvm-xfstests? The > kvm-xfstests image that I had up on www.kernel.org did not have > generic/456. It was dated from September 2017, so it didn't have that > test. Since the publically available image didn't have generic/456, > did you create your own image some how? Of course. I am using my own image and update xfstests frequently. > > I just updated the test appliance yesterday, so it does now. The > version stamp on it is: > > e2fsprogs v1.43.6-85-g7595699d0 (Wed, 6 Sep 2017 22:04:14 -0400) > fio fio-3.2 (Fri, 3 Nov 2017 15:23:49 -0600) > quota 4d81e8b (Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:42:44 +0200) > stress-ng 977ae35 (Wed, 6 Sep 2017 23:45:03 -0400) > xfsprogs v4.14.0-rc2-1-g19ca9b0b (Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:56:21 -0600) > xfstests-bld 0b27af9 (Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:28:51 -0500) > xfstests linux-v3.8-1797-g4f1eaa02 (Tue, 28 Nov 2017 15:49:06 -0500) > > Can you try the latest version of the kvm-xfststs test appliance image > that is on www.kernel.org, with the latest xfstests-bld git repo to > drive it? It works with latest image. 456 fails on old kernel and pass on v4.15-rc1. When I get to it, I will also check dm-log-write tests with latest image and rebuild my image from scratch to see if that changes anything. Thanks, Amir.
