All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"xfs@oss.sgi.com" <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [BULK]  Re: [PATCH] xfstests 311: test fsync with dm flakey V2
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 08:05:22 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130426220521.GC30622@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130426193101.GR2631@localhost.localdomain>

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 03:31:01PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 08:12:14PM -0600, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > Ok so I think I'll just make this test do all the iterations of the fsync tester
> > > with and without --nolockfs, since without --nolockfs I'm still seeing problems,
> > > does that sound reasonable?
> > 
> > Sounds like a fine plan to me ;)
> > 
> 
> Btw its test 19 O_DIRECT that gives me a 0 length file, the buffered case is
> fine.  The test just does a randomly sized sub-block sized write over and over
> again for a random number of times and fsync()'s in there randomly.  The number
> is 3072 because that's the largest inline extent we can have in btrfs, I added
> it specifically to test our inline extent logging.  Thanks,

Interesting - it only runs fsync every 8 iterations of the loop. Can
you check that it is running enough loops to execute a fsync?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	"xfs@oss.sgi.com" <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [BULK]  Re: [PATCH] xfstests 311: test fsync with dm flakey V2
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 08:05:22 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130426220521.GC30622@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130426193101.GR2631@localhost.localdomain>

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 03:31:01PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 08:12:14PM -0600, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > Ok so I think I'll just make this test do all the iterations of the fsync tester
> > > with and without --nolockfs, since without --nolockfs I'm still seeing problems,
> > > does that sound reasonable?
> > 
> > Sounds like a fine plan to me ;)
> > 
> 
> Btw its test 19 O_DIRECT that gives me a 0 length file, the buffered case is
> fine.  The test just does a randomly sized sub-block sized write over and over
> again for a random number of times and fsync()'s in there randomly.  The number
> is 3072 because that's the largest inline extent we can have in btrfs, I added
> it specifically to test our inline extent logging.  Thanks,

Interesting - it only runs fsync every 8 iterations of the loop. Can
you check that it is running enough loops to execute a fsync?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-26 22:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-25 14:12 [PATCH] xfstests 311: test fsync with dm flakey V2 Josef Bacik
2013-04-25 14:12 ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-25 22:45 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-25 22:45   ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26  0:24   ` [BULK] " Josef Bacik
2013-04-26  0:24     ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26  1:08     ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26  1:08       ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26  1:32       ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26  1:32         ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26  2:12         ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26  2:12           ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26 19:31           ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26 19:31             ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26 22:05             ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2013-04-26 22:05               ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26 22:32               ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26 22:32                 ` Josef Bacik
2013-04-26 22:49                 ` Dave Chinner
2013-04-26 22:49                   ` Dave Chinner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130426220521.GC30622@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jbacik@fusionio.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.