xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Question on xfstest 274

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Question on xfstest 274
From: WuBo <wu.bo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:43:24 +0800
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4F230E62.8020004@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4F230E62.8020004@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100921 Fedora/3.1.4-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.4
On 01/28/2012 04:51 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Hi, I was wondering if you could describe your intent for 274 just a little 
> more.
> 
> The test says:
> 
> # preallocation test
> 
> but that is the only comment other than copyright.  ;)

Maybe the comment is too simple :)

> 
> I see that it does:
> 
> # Make a 1G fs
> # Create a single 4k file
> # Allocate 1M past the EOF on that file
> # Completely fill remaining space, using 2 other files
> # Write 8k past EOF on the original file which has blocks past EOF
> 
> but I am not certain what you are testing.  I presume that
> you are testing the fact that the 1M past EOF should be truncated,
> freeing up space, and allowing the 8k write to succeed?
> Is that right?

Actually I write 8K at the end of 4K(seek=1), and what I want to test
is the 8K-write should be succeed because the preallocation 1M. At the
mean while, the file should not be truncated.

Thanks,
wubo

> 
> However, at least on ext4 I noticed that the "fill the fs"
> stage does not succeed; perhaps that should be tested as well.
> 
> I can do some similar work on this like I did for 275, but I need
> to be sure I understand your original intent for the test, first.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Eric
> 

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