On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 08:14:40AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 05:38:19PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > > Test that XFS reserves reasonable indirect blocks for delalloc and > > speculative allocation, and doesn't cause any fdblocks corruption. > > > > This was inspired by an XFS but that too large 'indlen' was returned by > > xfs_bmap_worst_indlen() which can't fit in a 17 bits value > > (STARTBLOCKVALBITS is defined as 17), then leaked 1 << 17 blocks in > > sb_fdblocks. > > > > This was only seen on XFS with rmapbt feature enabled, but nothing > > prevents the test from being a generic test. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > This reproduces sb_fdblocks corruption issue for me with 1k block size > > rmapbt enabled XFS on x86_64 and ppc64 hosts. Other block size XFS pass > > the test now. > > Looks reasonable; does the revert patch (posted earlier) fix it? Yes, I just confirmed that the revert patch did fix the bug for me. Thanks, Eryu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
