On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:51:22AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:34:24AM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > > Run 1000 fsstress processes and freeze/unfreeze file system randomly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > 293 | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 293.out | 4 +++ > > group | 1 + > > 3 files changed, 93 insertions(+) > > create mode 100755 293 > > create mode 100644 293.out > > > > diff --git a/293 b/293 > > new file mode 100755 > > index 0000000..a360e9c > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/293 > > @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ > > +#! /bin/bash > > +# FS QA Test No. 293 > > +# > > +# Test freeze/unfreeze file system randomly under fsstress > > What does this test do differently to 068? i.e. why do we need two > generic fsstress vs freeze tests? 068 does fixed number of iterations and sleep 2 seconds between each iteration and freeze/unfreeze operation. Also 068 only forks 2 fsstress processes, the load is relatively low. This test forks 1000 fsstress processes and does random freeze/unfreeze operations until all fsstress processes have done their jobs. Basically it's low stress with fixed ops vs relatively high stress with random ops. I agree that this test is a bit redundant, but I still perfer sending it out for review, if it's not needed I can drop it in next version. Thanks! Eryu > > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
