On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 09:42:27AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 02:06:39PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Upon enabling fsdax + reflink for XFS, this test began to report > > refcount metadata corruptions after being run. Specifically, xfs_repair > > noticed single-block refcount records that could be combined but had not > > been. > > > > The root cause of this is improper MAXREFCOUNT edge case handling in > > xfs_refcount_merge_extents. When we're trying to find candidates for a > > record merge, we compute the refcount of the merged record, but without > > accounting for the fact that once a record hits rc_refcount == > > MAXREFCOUNT, it is pinned that way forever. > > > > Adjust this test to use a sub-filesize write for one of the COW writes, > > because this is how we force the extent merge code to run. > > > > Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Seems like a reasonable modification to the test.... > > > --- > > tests/xfs/179 | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/179 b/tests/xfs/179 > > index ec0cb7e5b4..214558f694 100755 > > --- a/tests/xfs/179 > > +++ b/tests/xfs/179 > > @@ -21,17 +21,28 @@ _require_scratch_nocheck > > _require_cp_reflink > > _require_test_program "punch-alternating" > > > > +_fixed_by_kernel_commit XXXXXXXXXXXX "xfs: estimate post-merge refcounts correctly" > > Though I really don't like these annotation because when the test > fails in future as I'm developing new code it's going to tell me I > need a fix I already have in the kernel. This is just extra noise > that I have to filter out of the results output. IMO a comment for > this information or a line in the commit message is fine - it > just doesn't belong in the test output.... I'll turn that into a comment, since this originally was a functional test, not a regression test. > Other than that: > > Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx> Ok thanks! --D > > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
