On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 7:53 AM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Darrick J. Wong
> <darrick.wong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 06:50:05PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> [ Adding Darrick on the off chance that this triggers an "aha, of
>>> course it does!" ]
>>
>> Aha! Of course it does!!! :)
>
> Heh, thanks :). And apologies to Dave for missing his earlier note
> pointing out the delalloc failure, linux-nvdimm list ate the response.
>
>>
>>> Darrick these corruption tests you added to xfstests last year all
>>> fail the same way with DAX enabled. They spew:
>>>
>>> "pwrite64: Structure needs cleaning"
>>>
>>> ...reports that are cleaned up by running without "-o dax".
>>
>> I think this happens because in non-dax mode, the pwrite is a buffered
>> write and so long as we can create a delalloc reservation, everything
>> is ok and nothing fails. Whereas for dax we have to allocate the
>> blocks for the pwrite immediately, thereby triggering the cntbt
>> verifier error.
>>
>> Proceeding from the assumption "DAX behaves a lot like DIO", all the
>> tests that rely on buffered mode semantics are going to choke if DAX
>> is turned on without them knowing about it.
>>
>>> Alternatively you could sit back and watch me try to figure it out,
>>> that should be quite entertaining... as a start I'll try to pin down a
>>> stack trace when the error is returned.
>>
>> As for how to fix this, probably the best option is to change line 98
>> to 'pwrite -W -S 0x62...' and update the output to include the
>> 'structure needs cleaning' message.
>
> I'll give it a shot.
So, that did not modulate the failure or the passing case. However,
using -d at line 122 makes the no-dax case fail the same as the dax
case.
Would a change like this be acceptable in the interim while we figure
out which tests are delalloc sensitive, or did I just invalidate the
test?
diff --git a/tests/xfs/086 b/tests/xfs/086
index 143915bafaa1..26607c7a4697 100755
--- a/tests/xfs/086
+++ b/tests/xfs/086
@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ _scratch_mount
echo "+ modify files"
for x in `seq 1 64`; do
- $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite -S 0x62 0 ${blksz}"
"${TESTFILE}.${x}" >> $seqres.full
+ $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite -d -S 0x62 0 ${blksz}"
"${TESTFILE}.${x}" >> $seqres.full
done
umount "${SCRATCH_MNT}"
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ echo "broken: ${broken}"
# Try appending again, now that we've fixed the fs
echo "+ modify files (2)"
for x in `seq 1 64`; do
- $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite -S 0x62 ${blksz} ${blksz}"
"${TESTFILE}.${x}" >> $seqres.fu
+ $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite -d -S 0x62 ${blksz} ${blksz}"
"${TESTFILE}.${x}" >> $seqres
done
umount "${SCRATCH_MNT}"
diff --git a/tests/xfs/086.out b/tests/xfs/086.out
index 6c053f42deea..e2ec84e6b90f 100644
--- a/tests/xfs/086.out
+++ b/tests/xfs/086.out
@@ -16,5 +16,5 @@ broken: 1
+ mount image
+ chattr -R -i
+ check files (2)
-broken: 0
+broken: 1
+ check fs (2)
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
