On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:49:02AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:46:26PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> > Hey Brian,
> > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 06:35:14PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > On 10/11/2012 10:13 AM, Ben Myers wrote:
> > > > Hey Brian,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 10:17:12AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > >> The XFS_IOC_FREE_EOFBLOCKS ioctl allows users to invoke an EOFBLOCKS
> > > >> scan. The xfs_eofblocks structure is defined to support the command
> > > >> parameters (scan mode).
> > > >
> > > > It would help to have an xfstest to exercise this ioctl to pull in with
> > > > this
> > > > series. Do you have any code that could be wrangled into a test case?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, makes sense. I have some very basic test code I could put somewhere
> > > to invoke the ioctl(). One of the questions I've been meaning to ask is
> > > whether it would be relevant for that code to live in a common tool,
> > > such as adding a new command to xfs_io. Then perhaps create an xfstests
> > > test using that. Thoughts?
> > IMO you are right on the mark. xfs_io is a great place for this.
> > > FYI, I have a few other things on my plate at the moment so
> > > unfortunately it will be a bit before I can get back to XFS work... But
> > > I'm fine with the set pending until I can come up with some test
> > > coverage if that is preferable, of course.
> > I do think it is preferable to have a test case go in with the code where
> > possible. Since you don't mind waiting a bit, that seems to be the way to
> > go.
> > The other option could be to look for a volunteer to work on the test. ;)
> FWIW, given the background cleanup code can be trivially verified to
> work (open, apend, close, repeat, wait 5 minutes) and is the
> functionality that is needed in mainline, having something to test
> the ioctls should not stop the patchset from being merged.
$ for i in `seq 0 512`; do
> xfs_io -f -c "pwrite $((i * 4096)) 4096" /mnt/scratch/foo
$ stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
$ sync; stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
$ sleep 30; stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
$ sleep 300; stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
It works. ;)