Re: [PATCH] e2fsprogs: allocate inode table wholly within group

[Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>]

On 10/1/13 10:35 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 10/1/13 10:26 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 9/30/13 8:57 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 04:27:21PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The actual problem seems to be that the test does successive "-M" minimal resizes, and eventually we resize into the middle of an inode table, leaving the end of the table beyond the fs.
>>>>
>>>> Point "resize2fs -M" at the attached image once or twice w/ fscks in between and you should see it.
>>>
>>> I've been going through my patch backlog, so I finally had a chance to
>>> take a very close look at your test image.  I now understand why
>>> things are failing.
>>>
>>> 1) The test image (which you said was generated on a ppc e2fsprogs?)
>>> was doing something very weird as far as the location of the
>>> allocation bitmaps and inode table:
>>
>> Yes, this was just during a fedora build, during the "make check" phase.
>>
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=980519
>>
>> No idea why things should be coming out differently, that's a bit
>> alarming in and of itself.
>>
>> (Fedora isn't carrying any interesting patches to speak of).
> 
> But I am doing this:
> 
>  %check
> +# XXX ERS Hack for now; this bug has existed for a while,
> +# i.e. it is not a regression in this release, but there
> +# is no fix yet, and we need to get this package building.
> +# See Bug 987133 - resize2fs tests failing on ppc, s390
> +rm -rf tests/r_1024_small_bg*
> +rm -rf tests/r_64bit_big_expand*
> +rm -rf tests/r_bigalloc_big_expand*
> +rm -rf tests/r_ext4_big_expand*
>  make check
> 
> I'll retest w/ your patches, thanks.

Now all are passing on ppc64, last 3 are still failing on s390.  :(

-Eric