[PATCH v3] xfs_quota: print quota id number if the name can't be found

[Zorro Lang]

2016年5月11日 08:10，"Dave Chinner" <david at fromorbit.com>写道：
>
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 10:48:34PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > When use GETNEXTQUOTA ioctl to report project quota, it always
> > report an unexpected quota:
> >
> >   (null) 0 0 0 00 [--------]
> >
> > The ID 0 store the default quota, even if no one set default quota,
> > it still have quota accounting, but not enforced. So GETNEXTQUOTA
> > can find and report this undefined quota.
> >
> > From this problem, I thought if others' quota name miss, (null) will
> > be printed too. e.g.
> >
> >   # xfs_quota -xc "limit -u bsoft=300m bhard=400m test" $mnt
> >   # xfs_quota -xc "report -u" $mnt
> >   User ID          Used       Soft       Hard    Warn/Grace
> >   ---------- --------------------------------------------------
> >   root                0          0          0     00 [--------]
> >   test                0     307200     409600     00 [--------]
> >   # userdel -r test
> >   # xfs_quota -xc "report -u" $mnt
> >   User ID          Used       Soft       Hard    Warn/Grace
> >   ---------- --------------------------------------------------
> >   root                0          0          0     00 [--------]
> >   (null)              0     307200     409600     00 [--------]
> >
> > So this problem same with above id 0's problem. For deal with this,
> > this patch will print id number if the name can't be found.
> >
> > But if use old GETQUOTA ioctl, it won't print project id 0 quota
> > information(if it's not defined). That's different with GETNEXTQUOTA.
> > For keep consistent, this patch also print project id 0 when use old
> > GETQUOTA.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zorro Lang <zlang at redhat.com>
>
> OK, so with this applied xfs/133 and xfs/134 both now fail with
> this extra output:
>
> +#0 0 0 0 00 [--------]
>
> Can you send patches for these tests to filter out these lines so
> that the tests pass again for both old and new xfsprogs?

Hi Dave,

Sure, I'm doing on this. I remember that a patch from Eryu maybe suit for
this xfsprogs change(maybe need some modify). I'll check it and send a
suitable patch as soon as possible.

Thanks,
Zorro

>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david at fromorbit.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs at oss.sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/attachments/20160511/77ede33b/attachment-0001.html>