xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: make 275 xfs specific.

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: make 275 xfs specific.
From: Tao Ma <tm@xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 23:03:19 +0800
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tao.ma; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=GcFLF+0md0DHuFpWRWeq4kIICeruiq8W10BHZ2zeJrM=; b=eAqTHJtgvrW+y7RtgrmrM7B7yAujv+2JfzYCE0U2TOvUt9bPlH+7AEOSp1IXKIKHGwdQ1+oNj4rTWxzNPnwO7N5fAxBl9zwTX4zRGG7VaGGyPfgM7wKPqForxfr3SKUO;
In-reply-to: <20120505233744.GE25351@dastard>
References: <1336230429-2939-1-git-send-email-tm@xxxxxx> <20120505233744.GE25351@dastard>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1
On 05/06/2012 07:37 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 11:07:09PM +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
>> From: Tao Ma <boyu.mt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> In my test with ext4, 275 can't pass because ext4
>> can create a 8k file in the end not like what xfs
>> does. So make this test case xfs only for now.
> 
> It's not an XFS specific test - it's a test that is supposed to test
> POSIX write behaviour. i.e. if the filesystem is full, and then you
> free 4k of space, then an 8k write should only be able to write 4k,
> yes?
Yes, but it doesn't work as expected for ext4.
> 
> So doesn't a failure on ext4 indicate that there's something wrong
> with ext4 (either it's ENOSPC detection or the short write
> handling), not the test?
Actually in my test, ext4 can create the file with 8K file size, not a
short write. I haven't looked into it yet. But AFAICS, if we have an
ext4 volume with 8k cluster size, a 4k file can occupy a 8k cluster and
the final write of 8k will succeed instead of the short write.

Thanks
Tao

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