On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:08 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 05:33:34AM +0300, Amir G. wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:16 AM, Amir G. <amir73il@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 2:28 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 03:56:52PM +0300, amir73il@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >> >>> From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >>> >> >>> From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >>> >> >>> blkid knows to identify the ext4dev FSTYP of a partition that was >> >>> formatted with mkfs.ext4dev. >> >>> quota tools and various util-linux utils are also aware of ext4dev, >> >>> so ext4dev shares the same capabilities as ext4. >> >>> >> >>> Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >>> Tested-by: Sergey Ivanov <sergey57@xxxxxxxxx> >> >>> --- >> >>> ext4dev is used to test experimental ext4 code in mutual existance >> >>> with production ext4 code on the same system. >> >>> >> >>> Specifically, ext4 snapshots code is available for testing as a >> >>> stand-alone ext4dev module for Fedora 15 and Ubuntu 11.4 >> >>> (see http://next3.sf.net). >> >>> >> >>> v1 -> v2: >> >>> - undo change of fsck -t $FSTYP to fsck.$FSTYP >> >>> >> >>> common.defrag | 2 +- >> >>> common.quota | 4 ++-- >> >>> common.rc | 10 +++++----- >> >>> 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> >>> >> >>> diff --git a/common.defrag b/common.defrag >> >>> index 1bcf01d..4850803 100644 >> >>> --- a/common.defrag >> >>> +++ b/common.defrag >> >>> @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ _require_defrag() >> >>> xfs) >> >>> DEFRAG_PROG=/usr/sbin/xfs_fsr >> >>> ;; >> >>> - ext4) >> >>> + ext4|ext4dev) >> >>> DEFRAG_PROG=/usr/bin/e4defrag >> >>> ;; >> >>> *) >> >>> diff --git a/common.quota b/common.quota >> >>> index 3c87ce1..b6d5f16 100644 >> >>> --- a/common.quota >> >>> +++ b/common.quota >> >>> @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ _require_quota() >> >>> [ -n $QUOTA_PROG ] || _notrun "Quota user tools not installed" >> >>> >> >>> case $FSTYP in >> >>> - ext2|ext3|ext4|reiserfs) >> >>> + ext2|ext3|ext4|ext4dev|reiserfs) >> >>> if [ ! -d /proc/sys/fs/quota ]; then >> >>> _notrun "Installed kernel does not support quotas" >> >>> fi >> >>> @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ _check_quota_usage() >> >>> # Sync to get delalloc to disk >> >>> sync >> >>> VFS_QUOTA=0 >> >>> - if [ $FSTYP = "ext2" -o $FSTYP = "ext3" -o $FSTYP = "ext4" -o $FSTYP = "reiserfs" ]; then >> >>> + if [ $FSTYP = "ext2" -o $FSTYP = "ext3" -o $FSTYP = "ext4" -o $FSTYP = "ext4dev" -o $FSTYP = "reiserfs" ]; then >> >>> VFS_QUOTA=1 >> >>> quotaon -f -u -g $SCRATCH_MNT 2>/dev/null >> >>> fi >> >> >> >> Perhaps this should be changes to a case statement? >> >> >> > >> > you're making me go to v3 in such a trivial patch, but ok, I'll do it ;-) >> > >> >> I rechecked the fsck -t ext4dev vs. fsck.ext4dev. >> fsck -t ext4dev doesn't work for me :-( >> Sergey has a newer version of util-linux-ng >> see: >> >> amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ sudo fsck -t ext4dev -nf /dev/sda5 >> fsck from util-linux-ng 2.17.2 >> e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010) >> /dev/sda5 has unsupported feature(s): FEATURE_C7 FEATURE_C8 FEATURE_R7 >> e2fsck: Get a newer version of e2fsck! >> amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ sudo fsck.ext4dev -nf /dev/sda5 >> e2fsck 1.41.14-next3-1.0.13-7 (24-May-2011) >> Checking snapshots: 1,done >> Pass 1: Checking inodes, blocks, and sizes >> Pass 2: Checking directory structure >> Pass 3: Checking directory connectivity >> Pass 4: Checking reference counts >> Pass 5: Checking group summary information >> /dev/sda5: 6596/6561792 files (3.6% non-contiguous), 1242522/26216064 blocks >> amir@qalab:~/xfstests$ >> >> What do you thing, Dave? >> Should xfstests rely on a non-buggy generic fsck util, > > For filessytems that use the generic fsck multiplexor, yes. > >> or just >> implement it's own >> non-buggy generic fsck (invoke fsck.$FSTYP directly) > > In general, no. XFS is a special case in that fsck.xfs is a no-op - > it does no checking at all and only returns values needed for init > scripts to work correctly. xfs_repair/xfs_check are for checking the > filesystem... > >> I am running a recent system (Ubuntu 11.4) and I don't thing that upgrading >> util-linux should be a requirement for xfstests to work. > > We do not try to support every buggy piece of crap out there - if a > newer version of util-linux has already fixed the problem, then use > that and we don't need to do anything special with xfstests at all. > If you've got bleeding edge filesystem code that requires using a > ext4dev fstyp and a new ext4 userspace, then I think that requiring > you to use a non-buggy util-linux is not a big deal.... > no. not a big deal at all. > --- > > Personally I think that ext4dev shouldn't be supported at all. A > special fstyp iwhile ext4 was being developed was, IMO, a stupid > thing to do in the first place, and I was happy when it died. It > should not be resurrected and propagated. > > xfstests assumes that you are using a userspace that is current with > the version of the filesystem the kernel supports. If you are > running a development/special branch of ext4, then you need to be > running a userspace that understands it completely. If all you are > doing with the ext4dev fstyp is trying to vector to a different fsck > program that supports a new set of feature bits, then IMO you are > doing it all wrong. > > Fundamentally, the filesystem is either ext4 or it isn't. If the > features are never going to make it into mainline ext4, then you > need a completely different fstype and full userspace support for > that fstype. Once you have that, you can add the fstype support to > xfstests. However, just using a different fstyp just to set a > certain set of feature flags is, again IMO, a pretty stupid way of > going about this. > The features are going into mainline, but are not there yet. I did not invent the ext4dev standard, which is pretty well supported by all relevant tools, but I find it very convenient for the testing. Especially, when I expect my testers to be running a stable distro release (i.e. F15 or Ubuntu 11.4) and be able to install my experimental ext4dev module and utils, without it affecting their (most likely) root ext4/ext3 fs. > Cheers, > > Dave. > > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
