On 1/29/12 8:43 PM, WuBo wrote: > On 01/28/2012 04:51 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Hi, I was wondering if you could describe your intent for 274 just a little more. >> >> The test says: >> >> # preallocation test >> >> but that is the only comment other than copyright. ;) > > Maybe the comment is too simple :) > >> >> I see that it does: >> >> # Make a 1G fs >> # Create a single 4k file >> # Allocate 1M past the EOF on that file >> # Completely fill remaining space, using 2 other files >> # Write 8k past EOF on the original file which has blocks past EOF >> >> but I am not certain what you are testing. I presume that >> you are testing the fact that the 1M past EOF should be truncated, >> freeing up space, and allowing the 8k write to succeed? >> Is that right? > > Actually I write 8K at the end of 4K(seek=1), and what I want to test > is the 8K-write should be succeed because the preallocation 1M. At the > mean while, the file should not be truncated. Ah, right - I missed the conv=notrunc sorry. Ok, that all makes sense. I think I will try to clean up the test just a bit. Thanks, -Eric > Thanks, > wubo > >> >> However, at least on ext4 I noticed that the "fill the fs" >> stage does not succeed; perhaps that should be tested as well. >> >> I can do some similar work on this like I did for 275, but I need >> to be sure I understand your original intent for the test, first. >> >> Thanks, >> -Eric >> > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
