xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] XFS TESTS: ENOSPC Punch Hole Test

To: aelder@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] XFS TESTS: ENOSPC Punch Hole Test
From: Allison Henderson <achender@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:09:52 -0700
Cc: linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1311026953.2790.49.camel@doink>
References: <1310946766-30217-1-git-send-email-achender@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1311026953.2790.49.camel@doink>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
On 07/18/2011 03:09 PM, Alex Elder wrote:
On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 16:52 -0700, Allison Henderson wrote:
This patch set adds the ENOSPC test that was used for ext4 punch hole testing.
This test will verify that a hole can be punched even when the disk is full.
Reserved blocks should be used to complete the operation when there is not 
blocks
to further fragment the file.

Because punching a hole does not always require extra blocks, there needs to
be several iterations of punching holes, and then filling the file system to 
100%
usage before it is forced to grow the tree in order to handle the fragmentation.
The growing of the tree is what would cause ENOSPC if not for the use of 
reserved blocks.

I have reviewed both of your updated patches.  They
both look good to me.  I'll give it another day or
two for others to comment if they like, but unless
someone suggests changes I'll commit this for you.

Reviewed-by: Alex Elder<aelder@xxxxxxx>


Alrighty then, sounds good to me.  Thanks Alex!

Allison Henderson

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