From: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@kernel.org>
To: bingjingc <bingjingc@synology.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, bxxxjxxg@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] fstests: btrfs: test incremental send for changed reference paths
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:24:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220822112420.GA3115262@falcondesktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220822004932.1280053-1-bingjingc@synology.com>
On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 08:49:32AM +0800, bingjingc wrote:
> From: BingJing Chang <bingjingc@synology.com>
>
> Normally btrfs stores file paths in an array of ref items. However, items
> for the same parent directory can not exceed the size of a leaf. So btrfs
> also store the rest of them in extended ref items alternatively.
>
> In this test, it creates a large number of links under a directory causing
> the file paths stored in these two ways to be the parent snapshot. And it
> deletes and recreates just an amount of them that can be stored within an
> array of ref items to be the send snapshot. Test that an incremental send
> operation correctly issues link/unlink operations only against new/deleted
> paths, or the receive operation will fail due to a link on an existed path.
>
> This currently fails on btrfs but is fixed by a kernel patch with the
> commit 3aa5bd367fa5a3 ("btrfs: send: fix sending link commands for
> existing file paths")
>
> Signed-off-by: BingJing Chang <bingjingc@synology.com>
> ---
> tests/btrfs/272 | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tests/btrfs/272.out | 3 ++
> 2 files changed, 100 insertions(+)
> create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/272
> create mode 100644 tests/btrfs/272.out
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/272 b/tests/btrfs/272
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000..e1986de9
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/272
> @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# Copyright (c) 2022 BingJing Chang.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test No. btrfs/272
> +#
> +# Regression test for btrfs incremental send issue where a link instruction
> +# is sent against an existing path, causing btrfs receive to fail.
> +#
> +# This issue is fixed by the following linux kernel btrfs patch:
> +#
> +# commit 3aa5bd367fa5a3 ("btrfs: send: fix sending link commands for
> +# existing file paths")
> +#
> +. ./common/preamble
> +_begin_fstest auto quick send
> +
> +# Override the default cleanup function.
> +_cleanup()
> +{
> + cd /
> + rm -fr $send_files_dir
> + rm -f $tmp.*
> +}
> +
> +# Import common functions.
> +. ./common/filter
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +_supported_fs btrfs
I didn't tell you before, but I wasn't aware back then, that we now have
an annotation to specify kernel commits, se here we should add:
_fixed_by_kernel_commit 3aa5bd367fa5a3 \
"btrfs: send: fix sending link commands for existing file paths"
> +_require_test
> +_require_scratch
> +_require_fssum
> +
> +send_files_dir=$TEST_DIR/btrfs-test-$seq
> +
> +rm -fr $send_files_dir
> +mkdir $send_files_dir
> +
> +_scratch_mkfs > /dev/null 2>&1
> +_scratch_mount
> +
> +# Create a file and 2000 hard links to the same inode
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog subvolume create $SCRATCH_MNT/vol
> +touch $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/foo
> +for i in {1..2000}; do
> + link $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/foo $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/$i
> +done
> +
> +# Create a snapshot for a full send operation
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog subvolume snapshot -r $SCRATCH_MNT/vol $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog send -f $send_files_dir/1.snap $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +
> +# Remove 2000 hard links and re-create the last 1000 links
> +for i in {1..2000}; do
> + rm $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/$i
> +done
> +for i in {1001..2000}; do
> + link $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/foo $SCRATCH_MNT/vol/$i
> +done
> +
> +# Create another snapshot for an incremental send operation
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog subvolume snapshot -r $SCRATCH_MNT $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
So I ran the test on an unpatched kernel and it didn't fail!
The reason is that that command is taking a snapshot of $SCRATCH_MNT, when it
should be $SCRATCH_MNT/vol. So it wasn't testing what we were supposed to test.
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog send -p $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1 -f $send_files_dir/2.snap \
> + $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
> +
> +$FSSUM_PROG -A -f -w $send_files_dir/1.fssum $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +$FSSUM_PROG -A -f -w $send_files_dir/2.fssum \
> + -x $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2/snap1 $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
> +
> +# Recreate the filesystem by receiving both send streams and verify we get
> +# the same content that the original filesystem had.
> +_scratch_unmount
> +_scratch_mkfs >>$seqres.full 2>&1
> +_scratch_mount
> +
> +# Add the first snapshot to the new filesystem by applying the first send
> +# stream.
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog receive -f $send_files_dir/1.snap $SCRATCH_MNT
> +
> +# The incremental receive operation below used to fail with the following
> +# error:
> +#
> +# ERROR: link 1238 -> foo failed: File exists
> +#
> +# This is because the path "1238" was stored as an extended ref item in the
> +# original snapshot but as a normal ref item in the next snapshot. The send
> +# operation cannot handle the duplicated paths, which are stored in
> +# different ways, well, so it decides to issue a link operation for the
> +# existing path. This results in the receiver to fail with the above error.
> +_run_btrfs_util_prog receive -f $send_files_dir/2.snap $SCRATCH_MNT
Thanks for following the style of btrfs/241 and putting here an explanation
of why it failed!
Btw, this patch didn't reach the btrfs mailing list, you typed the address as
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.orgto", an extra "to" at the end.
So I'm adding the list to cc.
Anyway, with those two small changes, the patch will look good to me, then
you can add:
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>
Thanks for doing this!
> +
> +$FSSUM_PROG -r $send_files_dir/1.fssum $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1
> +$FSSUM_PROG -r $send_files_dir/2.fssum $SCRATCH_MNT/snap2
> +
> +status=0
> +exit
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/272.out b/tests/btrfs/272.out
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..b009b87a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/272.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
> +QA output created by 272
> +OK
> +OK
> --
> 2.37.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-22 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-22 0:49 [PATCH v2] fstests: btrfs: test incremental send for changed reference paths bingjingc
2022-08-22 11:24 ` Filipe Manana [this message]
2022-08-24 10:43 ` bingjing chang
2022-08-23 12:52 ` Zorro Lang
2022-08-24 10:42 ` bingjing chang
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=20220822112420.GA3115262@falcondesktop \
--to=fdmanana@kernel.org \
--cc=bingjingc@synology.com \
--cc=bxxxjxxg@gmail.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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.