On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 3:23 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Test that we can upgrade an existing filesystem to use bigtime.
>
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> common/xfs | 16 ++++++
> tests/xfs/908 | 117 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tests/xfs/908.out | 29 ++++++++++
> tests/xfs/909 | 149 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tests/xfs/909.out | 6 ++
> tests/xfs/group | 2 +
> 6 files changed, 319 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 tests/xfs/908
> create mode 100644 tests/xfs/908.out
> create mode 100755 tests/xfs/909
> create mode 100644 tests/xfs/909.out
>
>
> diff --git a/common/xfs b/common/xfs
> index cb6a1978..253a31e5 100644
> --- a/common/xfs
> +++ b/common/xfs
> @@ -1184,3 +1184,19 @@ _xfs_timestamp_range()
> awk '{printf("%s %s", $1, $2);}'
> fi
> }
> +
> +# Require that the scratch device exists, that mkfs can format with bigtime
> +# enabled, that the kernel can mount such a filesystem, and that xfs_info
> +# advertises the presence of that feature.
> +_require_scratch_xfs_bigtime()
> +{
> + _require_scratch
> +
> + _scratch_mkfs -m bigtime=1 &>/dev/null || \
> + _notrun "mkfs.xfs doesn't support bigtime feature"
> + _try_scratch_mount || \
> + _notrun "kernel doesn't support xfs bigtime feature"
> + $XFS_INFO_PROG "$SCRATCH_MNT" | grep -q -w "bigtime=1" || \
> + _notrun "bigtime feature not advertised on mount?"
> + _scratch_unmount
> +}
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/908 b/tests/xfs/908
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000..004a8563
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/xfs/908
> @@ -0,0 +1,117 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> +# Copyright (c) 2021 Oracle. All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test No. 908
> +#
> +# Check that we can upgrade a filesystem to support bigtime and that inode
> +# timestamps work properly after the upgrade.
> +
> +seq=`basename $0`
> +seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
> +echo "QA output created by $seq"
> +
> +here=`pwd`
> +tmp=/tmp/$$
> +status=1 # failure is the default!
> +trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
> +
> +_cleanup()
> +{
> + cd /
> + rm -f $tmp.*
> +}
> +
> +# get standard environment, filters and checks
> +. ./common/rc
> +. ./common/filter
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +_supported_fs xfs
> +_require_command "$XFS_ADMIN_PROG" "xfs_admin"
> +_require_scratch_xfs_bigtime
> +_require_xfs_repair_upgrade bigtime
> +
> +date --date='Jan 1 00:00:00 UTC 2040' > /dev/null 2>&1 || \
> + _notrun "Userspace does not support dates past 2038."
> +
> +rm -f $seqres.full
> +
> +# Make sure we can't upgrade a V4 filesystem
> +_scratch_mkfs -m crc=0 >> $seqres.full
> +_scratch_xfs_admin -O bigtime=1 2>> $seqres.full
> +_check_scratch_xfs_features BIGTIME
> +
> +# Make sure we're required to specify a feature status
> +_scratch_mkfs -m crc=1,bigtime=0,inobtcount=0 >> $seqres.full
> +_scratch_xfs_admin -O bigtime 2>> $seqres.full
> +
> +# Can we add bigtime and inobtcount at the same time?
> +_scratch_mkfs -m crc=1,bigtime=0,inobtcount=0 >> $seqres.full
> +_scratch_xfs_admin -O bigtime=1,inobtcount=1 2>> $seqres.full
> +
> +# Format V5 filesystem without bigtime support and populate it
> +_scratch_mkfs -m crc=1,bigtime=0 >> $seqres.full
> +_scratch_xfs_db -c 'version' -c 'sb 0' -c 'p' >> $seqres.full
> +_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full
> +
> +touch -d 'Jan 9 19:19:19 UTC 1999' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +touch -d 'Jan 9 19:19:19 UTC 1999' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +ls -la $SCRATCH_MNT/* >> $seqres.full
> +
> +echo before upgrade:
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +_scratch_unmount
> +_check_scratch_fs
> +
> +# Now upgrade to bigtime support
> +_scratch_xfs_admin -O bigtime=1 2>> $seqres.full
> +_check_scratch_xfs_features BIGTIME
> +_check_scratch_fs
> +_scratch_xfs_db -c 'version' -c 'sb 0' -c 'p' >> $seqres.full
> +
> +# Mount again, look at our files
> +_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full
> +ls -la $SCRATCH_MNT/* >> $seqres.full
> +
> +echo after upgrade:
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +# Bump one of the timestamps but stay under 2038
> +touch -d 'Jan 10 19:19:19 UTC 1999' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +
> +echo after upgrade and bump:
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +_scratch_cycle_mount
> +
> +# Did the bumped timestamp survive the remount?
> +ls -la $SCRATCH_MNT/* >> $seqres.full
> +
> +echo after upgrade, bump, and remount:
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +# Modify the other timestamp to stretch beyond 2038
> +touch -d 'Feb 22 22:22:22 UTC 2222' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +echo after upgrade and extension:
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +_scratch_cycle_mount
> +
> +# Did the timestamp survive the remount?
> +ls -la $SCRATCH_MNT/* >> $seqres.full
> +
> +echo after upgrade, extension, and remount:
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/a
> +TZ=UTC stat -c '%Y' $SCRATCH_MNT/b
> +
> +# success, all done
> +status=0
> +exit
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/908.out b/tests/xfs/908.out
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..5e05854d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/xfs/908.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
> +QA output created by 908
> +Running xfs_repair to upgrade filesystem.
> +Large timestamp feature only supported on V5 filesystems.
> +FEATURES: BIGTIME:NO
> +Running xfs_repair to upgrade filesystem.
> +Running xfs_repair to upgrade filesystem.
> +Adding inode btree counts to filesystem.
> +Adding large timestamp support to filesystem.
> +before upgrade:
> +915909559
> +915909559
> +Running xfs_repair to upgrade filesystem.
> +Adding large timestamp support to filesystem.
> +FEATURES: BIGTIME:YES
> +after upgrade:
> +915909559
> +915909559
> +after upgrade and bump:
> +915995959
> +915909559
> +after upgrade, bump, and remount:
> +915995959
> +915909559
Did you design those following days timestamps to look so cool? ;-)
> +after upgrade and extension:
> +915995959
> +7956915742
> +after upgrade, extension, and remount:
> +915995959
> +7956915742
Consider this test reviewed-by-me
I'd like more eyes on the quota grace period test, so not providing
a reviewed-by tag for the entire patch.
Thanks,
Amir.
