On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 11:34:38AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: [..] > > +# File size on lower > > +lowername="lowerfile" > > +lowerlink="lowerfile-link" > > +lowerdata="lower" > > +lowerblocks="32" > > +lowersize=$(( $lowerblocks * 512 )) > > + > > Although the test passes now on ext4/xfs, my comment remains - > it makes no sense for this test to calculate expected nr of blocks > instead of using actual lower file blocks. > > While fallocate $size guaranties that resulting file size is $size > you cannot say the same about $blocks. There is no guarantie > that file systems will use $size / 512 blocks to store size$. > file systems can and do allocate more blocks for e.g. xattr and > other file metadata. There is really no reason for this test to > make the assumption about $blocks however probable it may be. Ok. So instead of making assumptions about number of blocks, instead, create a file of pre-determined size, and then query the number of blocks from lower and use that as expected blocks from overlay mount? Will make that change. Thanks. Vivek -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
