xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS Test Case:252 - Shows Wrong Output

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS Test Case:252 - Shows Wrong Output
From: Amit Sahrawat <amit.sahrawat83@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 12:06:51 +0530
Cc: Allison Henderson <achender@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Og3KRSOJoEFOM7bPWMlWfNGulfmwuPaq+RD+iBXzRdM=; b=TLz/Kl61trGQq6YtHpDOZRsnJQuVE2Lu6qBej6rczrRPM3d6PfrkV7YWz5jZOGBMtT 80V+keYgprQ7GJTDuzlfvpvJ5Ajvds9rtCmZCsksyYZ681qLyt5PB8kAQELaKVRFnkXc PkKMomzMJIkzUVJUwExkhys3jupL6jgY7Yw48=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=s43TaeOIThgQEQ6tq2wA7/CFcqqnNge85Hul+AnjFuVuBEuOc7D5XAzMQwmE6vaW6j kSl4d46uCBLWh2t7eN94jwdIu4TX6m9Mdy6jUslvCNIkjyNJHPW30QkDuyIh//s08V9q j5ggJXdeO8McCE+MQPZ8kzC7KsJ4CKpQ+pOGI=
In-reply-to: <20110623062030.GY32466@dastard>
References: <BANLkTinBNa9ox+jDaorBoKdhoQQzTUA58A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <BANLkTi=wHAxYuLE33AVsc2rp0eEm5GB40w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E022818.7030406@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <BANLkTimuv183W0ef0aYCySWPnv9rLqNuww@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110623062030.GY32466@dastard>
Fortunately or Unfortunately I have 2.6.31(x86) and 2.6.35.13(ARM) and both do not support "fpunch". As per your earlier mail - 2.6.35.y does not support "fpunch" so I though of trying on 2.6.31.y.
 
I will check out for the return errors in this condition and will update more on this.
 
Thanks & Regards,
Amit Sahrawat


 
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:21:26AM +0530, Amit Sahrawat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> *PLATFORM      -- Linux/i686 localhost 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE*
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> The output as per the command mentioned by you:
> [root@localhost xfstests-2011-05-11]# xfs_io -f -c "truncate 20k" -c "falloc
> 0 20k" -c "pwrite 0k 8k" -c "fs
> ync" -c "pwrite 12k 8k" -c "fsync" -c "fpunch 4k 12k" -c "fiemap -v"
> /media/c/newfile
> wrote 8192/8192 bytes at offset 0
> 8 KiB, 2 ops; 0.0000 sec (434.028 MiB/sec and 111111.1111 ops/sec)
> command "fs
> ync" not found
> wrote 8192/8192 bytes at offset 12288
> 8 KiB, 2 ops; 0.0000 sec (977 MiB/sec and 250000.0000 ops/sec)
> /media/c/newfile:
> * EXT: FILE-OFFSET      BLOCK-RANGE      TOTAL FLAGS
>    0: [0..15]:         176..191            16   0x0
>    1: [16..23]:        192..199             8 0x800
>    2: [24..39]:        200..215            16   0x1
> *

The fpunch command did not punch the range out.

Amit, once again you're testing on a kernel (2.6.31) that does not
support the punch operation. As I suggested previously, you need to
find out why the fpunch command is not returning an error as that is
root cause of your failures.

Cheers,

Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>