On 7/29/13 12:21 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> So df in btrfs is tricky at best, and relying on it for accurate information is
> not great, but it's the best way to verify this test. So we need to add another
> sync to make sure the pinned blocks are all freed up and the df space is really
> really accurate, otherwise we end up with this test failling because the df
> after the test is slightly off (in my case it was like 36kb off). With this
> patch I'm not seeing random failures of this test. Thanks,
Honest question: does one more sync make this deterministic, or is it a best-effort, um, hack?
-Eric
> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tests/generic/315 | 3 ++-
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/generic/315 b/tests/generic/315
> index 7cfc40d..7c55b8a 100644
> --- a/tests/generic/315
> +++ b/tests/generic/315
> @@ -70,10 +70,11 @@ fsize=`ls -l $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq | awk '{print $5}'`
> # Truncate the file size back to 0
> truncate -s 0 $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq
> sync
> +sync
>
> # Preallocated disk space should be released
> avail_done=`df -P $TEST_DIR | awk 'END {print $4}'`
> -[ "$avail_done" -eq "$avail_begin" ] || _fail "Available disk space ($avail_done KiB)"
> +[ "$avail_done" -eq "$avail_begin" ] || _fail "Available disk space ($avail_done KiB) wanted ($avail_begin KiB)"
>
> # success, all done
> exit
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
