From: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>, Liu Bo <liubo2009@cn.fujitsu.com>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests btrfs/284: shorten duration, fix output
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 10:19:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51925612.5050002@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <517ACB41.2030002@redhat.com>
On 04/26/2013 01:45 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> test 284 had... some issues.
>
> First, it took so long nobody ran it; so shorten the extent
> count by a factor of about 100.
>
> Having fixed that, we see failures in 2 cases; when start or
> len is -1, but the golden output file didn't have error
> output, as if they should pass.
>
> I'm going to argue that these *should* both fail; start = -1
> has no real meaning. length = -1 might mean "the rest
> of the file" but if that's what you really want, just
> don't specify -l.
>
> So add failure output for those cases.
>
> Send all command output to $seq.full, in case that changes
> in the future; just capture the return value.
>
> Then remove the return value echo on failure (50?) because
> who knows when that might change to some other magic value.
>
> Ok, then when defrag actually works, old defrag returned
> "20" (because?) but a recent commit changed it to 0.
> So accommodate that too.
>
> And remove a stray "HAVE_DEFRAG=1" while we're at it.
> That variable is never used.
>
So should I be seeing failures with
btrfs-progs-0.20-0.2.git91d9eec.el6.x86_64 installed?
./check btrfs/284
FSTYP -- btrfs
PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 cxfsxe4 3.9.0+
MKFS_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdk2
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/sdk2 /mnt/scratch
btrfs/284 - output mismatch (see
/usr/src/rcj/xfstests/results/btrfs/284.out.bad)
--- tests/btrfs/284.out 2013-05-14 09:31:35.000000000 -0500
+++ /usr/src/rcj/xfstests/results/btrfs/284.out.bad 2013-05-14
10:10:45.000000000 -0500
@@ -6,7 +6,6 @@
btrfs filesystem defragment failed!
a single file | start > file size && 0 < len < file size | off
a single file | start = 0 && len < 0 | off (should fail)
-btrfs filesystem defragment failed!
a single file | start = 0 && len > file size | off
a single file | start = 0 && 0 < len < file size | off
a directory | default | off
...
(Run 'diff -u tests/btrfs/284.out
/usr/src/rcj/xfstests/results/btrfs/284.out.bad' to see the entire diff)
Ran: btrfs/284
Failures: btrfs/284
Failed 1 of 1 tests
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-14 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-26 18:45 [PATCH] xfstests btrfs/284: shorten duration, fix output Eric Sandeen
2013-05-14 15:19 ` Rich Johnston [this message]
2013-05-14 17:38 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-05-14 20:42 ` Josef Bacik
2013-05-15 1:42 ` Liu Bo
2013-05-15 12:30 ` Rich Johnston
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=51925612.5050002@sgi.com \
--to=rjohnston@sgi.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liubo2009@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=sandeen@redhat.com \
--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).