linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
To: Eric Whitney <enwlinux@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu
Subject: Re: possible dev branch regression - xfstest 285/1k
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 23:09:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130316150923.GA18589@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130315222818.GA16100@wallace>

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 06:28:18PM -0400, Eric Whitney wrote:
> I'm seeing Xfstest 285 consistently fail for the 1k test case using the
> latest dev branch while running on both x86 and ARM.  Subtest 08 is
> the problem. From the test output:
> 
> 08. Test file with unwritten extents, only have unwritten pages
> 08.01 SEEK_HOLE expected 0 or 4194304, got 11264.                 FAIL
> 08.02 SEEK_HOLE expected 1 or 4194304, got 11264.                 FAIL
> 08.03 SEEK_DATA expected 10240 or 10240, got 0.                   FAIL
> 08.04 SEEK_DATA expected 10240 or 10240, got 1.                   FAIL
> 
> From previous discussions, we expect 285 to fail in the ext3 (nodelalloc,
> no flex_bg, and no extents) test case, but in subtest 07.  It still does
> that.
> 
> In the dev branch, reverting 4f42f80a8f - "ext4: use s_extent_max_zeroout_kb
> value as number of kb" - results in success for 285 in the 1k test case.

Hi Eric,

I see what's going on.  First of all it isn't a bug. :-)  Please let me
describe why it happens.

In this commit (4f42f80a8f), it tries to fix a bug that we never zero
out an unwritten extent.  So after applied it, when an unwritten extent
is converted, it could be zeroed out.  In xfstests #285 subtest 08 it
preallocates an unwritten extent which is 4MB.  Then it writes some data
at offset 10 * blocksize, which the length is one blocksize, and calles
sync_file_range(2) to flush it.  So the call trace looks like:

ext4_fallocate()
  ->ext4_map_blocks()
    [one unwritten extent is allocated]
ext4_file_write()
ext4_da_writepages()
  ->ext4_map_blocks() with EXT4_GET_BLOCKS_CREATE flag
    ->ext4_ext_handle_uninitialized_extents()
      ->ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized()

In ext4_ext_convert_to_initialized() it tries to zero out unwritten
extent if condition is matched.  Let's see what happens.

case a) 1k block size
  max_zeroout: 32
  ee_len: 4096
  allocated: 4086
  m_len: 1

In this case, the following condition is matched.

fs/ext4/extents.c:3310

        else if (map->m_lblk - ee_block + map-m_len < max_zeroout)
                 10          - 0        + 1         < 32

So unwritten extent [0,11] will be converted to written.  That is why
11264 (11 * 1k) is returned when we seek a hole from offset 0 and 1,
and 0 and 1 are returned when we seek a data from offset 0 and 1.

case b) 4k block size
  max_zeroout: 8
  ee_len: 1024
  allocated: 1014
  m_len: 1

In this case, the above condition won't be matched.

        else if (map->m_lblk - ee_block + map-m_len < max_zeroout)
                 10          - 0        + 1         < 8

So only one unwritten extent [10, 1] is converted, and the test can
pass.

Regards
                                                - Zheng

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-03-16 14:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-15 22:28 possible dev branch regression - xfstest 285/1k Eric Whitney
2013-03-16  2:32 ` Zheng Liu
2013-03-16 15:09 ` Zheng Liu [this message]
2013-03-17  3:06   ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-17  6:13     ` Zheng Liu
2013-03-18 16:10     ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-18 16:54       ` gnehzuil.liu
2013-03-18 17:09       ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-18 17:34         ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-18 20:41           ` Ben Myers
2013-03-18 23:12             ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-19  1:40               ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-19  2:07                 ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-19  1:47               ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-19  2:00                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-03-19  2:22                   ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-19  2:28                   ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-19  8:50                     ` Lukáš Czerner
2013-03-17  3:36   ` Eric Whitney

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=20130316150923.GA18589@gmail.com \
    --to=gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com \
    --cc=enwlinux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /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).