2016年5月12日 02:54，"Eric Sandeen" <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>写道：
>
>
>
> On 5/11/16 12:36 PM, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 11:04:28AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> On 5/11/16 10:05 AM, Zorro Lang wrote:
> >>> After GETNEXTQUOTA ioctl be supported, xfs_quota -c "report" always
> >>> outputs one more quota info about default quota (as project ID 0).
> >>> For fix this problem, xfsprogs has merged commit 3d607a1.
> >>
> >> This is only for project quota, right? user & group quota always
> >> reports id 0 / root, because it exists in the passwd and group files.
> >
> > Yes, only for project quota. The truth is we decide to report project
> > quota #0 always, so we can just add one line "#0 0 0 0 00 ...." into
> > xfs/133 and xfs/134 golden output file simply.
> >
> > But for history reason, we can't do that. Mostly old xfsprogs still
> > report "(null) 0 0 0 00 ..."(if use GETNEXTQUOTA), or don't report
> > project id #0 (if use old GETQUOTA).
>
> Right, so filter that out? ;)
>
> ...
>
> >> Why not just do it as an actual filter, i.e.:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> diff --git a/common/filter b/common/filter
> >> index 1be377c..2012729 100644
> >> --- a/common/filter
> >> +++ b/common/filter
> >> @@ -302,6 +302,13 @@ _filter_quota()
> >> sed -e 'N;s/TEST_DEV\n/TEST_DEV/g'
> >> }
> >>
> >> +_filter_project_quota()
> >> +{
> >> + # Project ID 0 is always present on disk but was not reported
> >> + # until the GETNEXTQUOTA ioctl came into use. Filter it out.
> >> + _filter_quota | grep -v "^\#0"
> >> +}
> >
> > I thought about this before I send this patch. But I don't know if it's
> > necessary to add a new common function. I thought the one who write
> > a case need to report project, who can decide how to deal with
> > its project id #0 output.
> >
> > Likes what I did in xfs/133. I named projid 0 to "root", then fileter
> > project name root directly. If we add a function named _filter_project_quota,
> > and we tell others it can filter project ID 0. But if someone named
> > projid #0, this function become hard to understand.
>
> yes, but that's a lot of manual fiddling for every test that does a report
> of a project quota. Most don't care at all about id 0.
>
> If someone wants project ID 0 reported, just use _filter_quota instead
> of _filter_project_quota.
>
> If someone gives prjid 0 a name "foobarbaz" then it won't be filtered,
> and I think that's fine, they were doing something quite intentional.
> All the filter does is suppress the default output which is new to any
> test reporting project quota.
>
> > Likes xfs/299, it named projid #0 to "root", and add "root" quota output
> > into golden image. That's another way to deal with this bug. Maybe better?
>
> I really think that a single, common filter function for a common form
> of output makes more sense than expecting each test to handle it on a
> case-by-case basis.
Hmm, I can't find more reason to refute this. So l'll follow your suggestion and send the v2 patch soon :)
Thanks,
Zorro
>
> -Eric
>
> > Thanks,
> > Zorro
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
_______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
