On 11/2/12 7:16 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 10:03:34AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 01:59:23PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: >>> Hi Dave, >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:51:02PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:15:01AM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: >>>>> Hi Folks, >>>>> >>>>> We're working toward a userspace release this month. There are several patches >>>>> that need to go in first, including backing out the xfsdump format version bump >>>>> from Eric, fixes for the makefiles from Mike, and the Polish language update >>>>> for xfsdump from Jakub. If anyone knows of something else we need, now is the >>>>> time to flame about it. I will take a look around for other important patches >>>>> too. > .... >>> The TODO list for userspace release currently stands at: >>> >>> 1) fix the header checksum failures... which is resolved >>> 2) fix a futex hang in 059 >>> 3) fix the golden output changes related to multistream support in xfsdump >>> and --largefs >> >> Well, understand them first, then fix ;) >> >>> 4) test on more platforms > > Another: > > $ sudo xfs_info /mnt/scratch/ > meta-data=/dev/vdc isize=256 agcount=4, agsize=12800 blks > = sectsz=512 attr=2 > data = bsize=4096 blocks=51200, imaxpct=25 > = sunit=0 swidth=0 blks > naming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0 > log =internal bsize=4096 blocks=1200, version=2 > = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1 > realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 > $ sudo xfs_db -r -c "sb 0" -c "version" /dev/vdc > versionnum [0xb4a4+0x8a] = V4,NLINK,ALIGN,DIRV2,LOGV2,EXTFLG,MOREBITS,ATTR2,LAZYSBCOUNT,PROJID32BIT > $ > > xfs_info is not reporting the 32 bit project ID status. Weird, I didn't realize that [PATCH 2/2] xfsprogs: report projid32 status in growfs output hadn't been pulled in. > Yes, I know this requires the XFS_IOC_FSGEOM support for it, but I'd > like it this release to at least say "off or unknown" here. Heh, ok, when you reviewed you said it was no big deal ;) but I guess we can add the "or unknown" if you like. > I say this, because this is the first thing I noticed when having a > look at a test 287 failure: Hm that's pretty odd. -Eric > 7 10s ... - output mismatch (see 287.out.bad) > --- 287.out 2012-10-05 11:38:08.000000000 +1000 > +++ 287.out.bad 2012-11-03 10:55:15.000000000 +1100 > @@ -2,22 +2,24 @@ > No 32bit project quotas: > projid = 1234 > projid = 0 > +xfs_quota: cannot set project on /mnt/scratch/pquota/32bit: Invalid argument > With 32bit project quota support: > projid = 1234 > -projid = 2123456789 > +projid = 0 > +xfs_quota: cannot set project on /mnt/scratch/restore/pquota/32bitv2: Invalid argument > The restored file system + one additional file: > projid = 1234 > -projid = 2123456789 > -projid = 2123456789 > +projid = 0 > +projid = 0 > These two values of 16bit project quota ids shall be the same > -core.projid_lo = 1234 > +core.projid_lo = 0 > core.projid_hi = 0 > core.projid_lo = 1234 > core.projid_hi = 0 > These three values of 32bit project quota ids shall be the same > -core.projid_lo = 24853 > -core.projid_hi = 32401 > -core.projid_lo = 24853 > -core.projid_hi = 32401 > -core.projid_lo = 24853 > -core.projid_hi = 32401 > +core.projid_lo = 0 > +core.projid_hi = 0 > +core.projid_lo = 0 > +core.projid_hi = 0 > +core.projid_lo = 0 > +core.projid_hi = 0 > > Here's what's curious - this is failing on the 17TB filesystem, but > is not failing on 10-20GB filesystems. There seems to be a pattern > here.... > > Note that I only recently updated xfstests on the VM with the 17TB > filesystem (i.e. on wednesday), so this is probably the first time I > have run test 287 on a large filesystem like this. Same goes for > much of the other problems I'm reporting - xfstests on this machine > has been running out of dev branch I hadn't updated for a while, so > these problems might have been around for a while on large > filesystems... > > Cheers, > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
