From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35938 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751559AbdFGDID (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Jun 2017 23:08:03 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 11:08:01 +0800 From: Eryu Guan Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic: test Btrfs delalloc accounting overflow Message-ID: <20170607030801.GU19952@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> References: <49a0c7551c337566be29b2c073ba0be57779d321.1496391726.git.osandov@fb.com> <20170603073700.GA30383@infradead.org> <20170607000305.GB31692@vader.DHCP.thefacebook.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170607000305.GB31692@vader.DHCP.thefacebook.com> Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Omar Sandoval Cc: Christoph Hellwig , fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com List-ID: On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 05:03:05PM -0700, Omar Sandoval wrote: > On Sat, Jun 03, 2017 at 12:37:00AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > This looks like a btrfs-specific test, and not like a generic one > > to me. > > Nothing about the workload itself is btrfs-specific, we just have the > extra check at the end. But I don't really care, I can make it a btrfs > test unless Eryu has already applied it. What's not very clear to me is that how do we check the accountings for non-btrfs filesystems, i.e. what would cause a test failure on non-btrfs filesystems besides an xfs_io write failure? I'd prefer a btrfs-specific test if there's no good way to do the check. Or if we want to keep it a generic test, some comments on the non-btrfs case would be good. I'm fine with either way. Thanks, Eryu