From: Sunil Mushran <sunil.mushran@oracle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests 255: add a seek_data/seek_hole tester
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 10:10:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E0B5C6F.3060803@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110629074021.GA26086@infradead.org>
On 06/29/2011 12:40 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 04:53:07PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:33:19AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>> This is a test to make sure seek_data/seek_hole is acting like it does on
>>> Solaris. It will check to see if the fs supports finding a hole or not and will
>>> adjust as necessary.
>> So I just looked at this with an eye to validating an XFS
>> implementation, and I came up with this list of stuff that the test
>> does not cover that I'd need to test in some way:
>>
>> - files with clean unwritten extents. Are they a hole or
>> data? What's SEEK_DATA supposed to return on layout like
>> hole-unwritten-data? i.e. needs to add fallocate to the
>> picture...
>>
>> - files with dirty unwritten extents (i.e. dirty in memory,
>> not on disk). They are most definitely data, and most
>> filesystems will need a separate lookup path to detect
>> dirty unwritten ranges because the state is kept
>> separately (page cache vs extent cache). Plenty of scope
>> for filesystem specific bugs here so needs a roubust test.
> The discussion leading up to the resurrection of SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA
> was pretty much about that point. The conclusion based on the Sun
> documentation and common sense was that SEEK_DATA may only consider
> unwritten extents as hole if the filesystem has a way to distinguish
> plain unwritten extents and those that have been dirtied. Else it
> should be considered data.
>
> Testing for making sure dirty preallocated areas aren't wrongly
> reported sounds relatively easy, the rest falls into implementation
> details, which imho is fine. Not reporting preallocated extents
> as holes just is a quality of implementation issue and not a bug.
I agree. And if I might add my 2 cents that it would be much easier
if we added another test that created files with all the worrisome boundary
conditions and used SEEK_DATA/HOLE to copy the files and compared
using md5sum. This would be far easier than one that expects a certain
pos for each operation.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-29 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-28 15:33 [PATCH 1/4] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA flags Josef Bacik
2011-06-28 15:33 ` [PATCH 2/4] Btrfs: implement our own ->llseek Josef Bacik
2011-06-28 15:33 ` [PATCH 3/4] Ext4: handle SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA generically Josef Bacik
2011-06-28 15:33 ` [PATCH 4/4] fs: handle SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA properly in all fs's that define their own llseek Josef Bacik
2011-06-28 15:33 ` [PATCH] xfstests 255: add a seek_data/seek_hole tester Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 6:53 ` Dave Chinner
2011-06-29 7:40 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 10:42 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-06-29 17:29 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-06-29 17:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 17:40 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-06-29 21:29 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-07-01 9:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-06-29 17:10 ` Sunil Mushran [this message]
2011-06-29 17:52 ` Josef Bacik
2011-06-29 13:19 ` Josef Bacik
2011-08-25 6:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-25 6:40 ` Dave Chinner
2011-08-25 6:51 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-08-26 1:35 ` Dave Chinner
2011-08-26 6:24 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-26 14:41 ` Zach Brown
2011-08-27 8:30 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-28 10:17 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-30 17:42 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-31 1:17 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-31 3:29 ` Dave Chinner
2011-08-31 3:53 ` david
2011-08-31 4:43 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-31 9:05 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-08-31 4:48 ` Dan Merillat
2011-07-29 9:58 ` [PATCH 1/4] fs: add SEEK_HOLE and SEEK_DATA flags Marco Stornelli
2011-08-20 9:41 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-20 10:03 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-20 15:36 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-20 16:32 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-22 6:08 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-22 10:56 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-22 15:57 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-22 17:56 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-22 21:22 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-08-23 17:44 ` Marco Stornelli
2011-08-31 0:35 ` Dave Chinner
[not found] ` <CAGpXXZ+xjhadprkc_LiP3qUypLLkCxdeEmo8+K+6mOnBuNhmLg@mail.gmail.com>
2011-08-20 17:18 ` Greg Freemyer
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-06-27 18:02 Josef Bacik
2011-06-27 18:02 ` [PATCH] xfstests 255: add a seek_data/seek_hole tester Josef Bacik
2011-06-27 18:32 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-06-27 18:47 ` Josef Bacik
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=4E0B5C6F.3060803@oracle.com \
--to=sunil.mushran@oracle.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=josef@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).