Re: [PATCH v2] Count journal size in test 289

[Rich Johnston <rjohnston@xxxxxxx>]

On 03/20/2013 09:31 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 3/20/13 5:50 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Test 289 ignored the fact that historically journal is not accounted as
> > fs overhead in ext3. For larger filesystems it is hidden in 1% tolerance
> > but for filesystems smaller than 12G the test fails. So make the
> > counting precise to work everywhere.
> >
> > CC: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> Looks fine, thanks.
>
> Reviewed-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> p.s. - sorry, didn't catch this the first time:
>
> _filter_size_to_bytes won't work for lowercase units, which might
> be nice.  How about:
>
> > +       case $suffix in
> > +               k|K) mul=1024 ;;
> > +               m|M) mul=$((1024*1024)) ;;
> > +               g|G) mul=$((1024*1024*1024)) ;;
> > +               t|T) mul=$((1024*1024*1024*1024)) ;;
> > +       esac
> SGI guys - maybe could do that as a small fix-up on commit.  Otherwise, if 
> anyone
> ever needs lower case they could just add it at the same time, so no big deal.
Will do thanks for the review.

--Rich

> -Eric