Hey Eric, On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:14:12AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 07:05:51PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > On 10/13/12 6:34 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 11:52:05AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > >> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:19:55AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > >>> xfs_quota has long set XFS_XFLAG_PROJINHERIT on all files, > > >>> and tested for presence on all files. However, Dave's semi-recent > > >>> xfs_repair update is now flagging this as an error: > > >> > > >> I think we should rever that part of the repair patch. While there > > >> really is not point to have XFS_XFLAG_PROJINHERIT set on non-directory > > >> files we have been setting it for year, so repair should cope with that. > > > > > > Repair does cope with it - it issues a warning and clears the flag. > > > It doesn't stop, it simply fixes an inconsistency in the inode flags. > > > > > > The main problem, by the sounds of it, is that repair issues a > > > warning that it is clearing the flags that should not be set. This > > > is what makes check_scratch_fs fail because of the extra output. > > > That's easy to fix - filter the line from the repair output and be > > > done with it. In future (with Eric's patch) this situation won't > > > occur. > > > > > > So, really, I think the only thing that needs modifying to handle > > > this situation is a filter update to xfstests... > > > > I must be missing something; quota will continue to set it and repair > > will continue to clear it. One should probably match the other right? > > So one or the other should change. > > Sorry, I wasn't particularly clear - if your patch to quota goes in, > the problem goes away in future and we should simply filter the > warning in xfstests to handle the present issue.... I think Dave has an interesting idea here. You already have: 1) only set XFS_XFLAG_PROJINHERIT on directories in setup_project, 2) update check_project to print the right warning based upon the above, Now all you need is: 3) update _check_scratch_fs to filter "directory flags set on non-directory inode %llu" I guess the downside of that is the test might subsequently miss other related failure modes of xfs_repair. Maybe it would be better to make xfs_repair have a separate error message for this specific case, and then filter that out of the test output. How would you know when it's ok to remove the filter? Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
