From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
hch@infradead.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] Add test of quota accounting using fsx
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:15:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100727081538.GB3358@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C4E0229.5040002@sandeen.net>
On Mon 26-07-10 16:46:17, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 06/15/2010 04:55 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Wed 09-06-10 12:49:49, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> Jan Kara wrote:
> >>> Run fsx (and also several fsx threads in parallel) and verify that
> >>> quota accounting is correct after they finish.
> >>
> >> Jan, I'm having trouble with this one on XFS for some reason, with our
> >> RHEL6 kernel and quota-3.17...
> > OK, attached is an improvement to the XFSQA tests after which all quota
> > tests pass for XFS just fine.
> > The second patch is just minor general improvement of _require_scratch
> > macro.
> > Could they be added to XFSQA repository? Thanks.
>
> Jan, I've got some ext4 failures reported on these, although I can't hit
> them, so not quite sure what's going on.
>
> In 231:
>
> +< fsgqa -- 760 0 0 3 0 0
> +---
> +> fsgqa -- 764 0 0 3 0 0
> +14c14
> +< fsgqa -- 760 0 0 3 0 0
> +---
> +> fsgqa -- 764 0 0 3 0 0
>
> after the quotacheck & repquota we have 4 more blocks. Maybe this
> is due to my accounting of metadata blocks at write time, and not
> before ... would it be reasonable to put a sync call as the first
> line of check_usage() ?
Just last week a change went into xfstests which introduces a generic
quota checking function and uses sync before getting quota usage. I think
xfstests passed for me with ext4 after this change but I've now restarted
the tests to recheck it.
> Also in 233:
>
> +< #501 -- 15392 0 0 998 0 0
> +< #501 -- 15392 32000 32000 998 1000 1000
> +---
> +> #501 +- 32084 32000 32000 7days 998 1000 1000
> +> #501 -- 32084 0 0 998 0 0
>
> "7days" magically appeared after the quotacheck. Not sure what's going
> on there...
That's because the usage after checking exceeded block soft limit and
thus grace time has been set. So it's the same problem as in the above
test.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-27 8:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1274710459-11446-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
[not found] ` <1274710459-11446-5-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
[not found] ` <4C0FD43D.3040803@sandeen.net>
[not found] ` <20100615095505.GB3347@quack.suse.cz>
2010-07-26 21:46 ` [PATCH 4/8] Add test of quota accounting using fsx Eric Sandeen
2010-07-27 8:15 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2010-07-27 8:48 ` Jan Kara
2010-07-27 13:11 ` Eric Sandeen
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=20100727081538.GB3358@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--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).