* xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag
@ 2014-11-13 21:16 Steve French
2014-11-13 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-11-13 21:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Steve French @ 2014-11-13 21:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-fsdevel, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
I see an earlier thread about ext4 defrag problems causing this
failure on xfstest generic/018 running on ext4
generic/018 1s ... [failed, exit status 1] - output mismatch (see
/home/sfrench/xfstests/results//generic/018.out.bad)
--- tests/generic/018.out 2014-11-13 11:20:05.385406288 -0800
+++ /home/sfrench/xfstests/results//generic/018.out.bad 2014-11-13
12:33:19.317806287 -0800
@@ -10,10 +10,5 @@
After: 1
Write backwards sync, but contiguous - should defrag to 1 extent
Before: 10
-After: 1
-Write backwards sync leaving holes - defrag should do nothing
-Before: 16
-After: 16
...
but wasn't clear whether it was fixed upstream. It failed on two out
of three runs for me on most current ext4. My test is on most current
Ubuntu x86_64 (and with 3.18-rc3 kernel)
I couldn't find version info for e4defrag from the command line but
other ext4 tools are reasonably recent it seems as Ubuntu packages
them e.g. EXT2FS Library version 1.42.10, 18-May-2014
Is generic xfstest 18 still broken on ext4?
Also am curious about test generic/026
generic/026 [not run] ext4 does not define maximum ACL count
Is that expected?
--
Thanks,
Steve
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag
2014-11-13 21:16 xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag Steve French
@ 2014-11-13 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-11-13 22:02 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-11-13 21:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2014-11-13 21:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve French, linux-fsdevel, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
On 11/13/14 3:16 PM, Steve French wrote:
> I see an earlier thread about ext4 defrag problems causing this
> failure on xfstest generic/018 running on ext4
>
> generic/018 1s ... [failed, exit status 1] - output mismatch (see
> /home/sfrench/xfstests/results//generic/018.out.bad)
> --- tests/generic/018.out 2014-11-13 11:20:05.385406288 -0800
> +++ /home/sfrench/xfstests/results//generic/018.out.bad 2014-11-13
> 12:33:19.317806287 -0800
> @@ -10,10 +10,5 @@
> After: 1
> Write backwards sync, but contiguous - should defrag to 1 extent
> Before: 10
> -After: 1
> -Write backwards sync leaving holes - defrag should do nothing
> -Before: 16
> -After: 16
> ...
>
> but wasn't clear whether it was fixed upstream. It failed on two out
> of three runs for me on most current ext4. My test is on most current
> Ubuntu x86_64 (and with 3.18-rc3 kernel)
> I couldn't find version info for e4defrag from the command line but
> other ext4 tools are reasonably recent it seems as Ubuntu packages
> them e.g. EXT2FS Library version 1.42.10, 18-May-2014
>
> Is generic xfstest 18 still broken on ext4?
Did you try upstream?
When I test upstream, it passes. Because:
# git log --oneline v1.42.10.. misc/e4defrag.c
c7c539e e4defrag: backwards-allocated files should be defragmented too
47fee2e e2fsprogs: introduce ext2fs_close_free() helper
So no, it is not still broken.
> Also am curious about test generic/026
>
> generic/026 [not run] ext4 does not define maximum ACL count
>
> Is that expected?
in common/attr:
# filesystems that want to test maximum supported acl counts need to
# add support in here
_acl_get_max()
...
Because ext4 has not added support there, yes, it is expected that it
will not run. ;)
I don't honestly know if ext4 has an upper limit on acls.
-Eric
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag
2014-11-13 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
@ 2014-11-13 22:02 ` Theodore Ts'o
[not found] ` <CAH2r5ms6W1GQwzC2TFb87PK8UpPXmCWikQZEnWpw6aZQNdry7w@mail.gmail.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2014-11-13 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Steve French, linux-fsdevel, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 03:36:13PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>
> I don't honestly know if ext4 has an upper limit on acls.
The limit is based on the blocksize; but this test seems to assume an
absolute count of the number of acl entries, and looking at the xfs
max code, it looks like if we just wired it up to some arbitrary
number, such as "32", it would probably allow ext4 to run the test and
pass it correctly. I'm not sure it's would test something useful
that's not tested by the other xfstests, though.
- Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag
2014-11-13 21:16 xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag Steve French
2014-11-13 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
@ 2014-11-13 21:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2014-11-13 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Steve French; +Cc: linux-fsdevel, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 03:16:30PM -0600, Steve French wrote:
>
> Is generic xfstest 18 still broken on ext4?
Yes; the e4defrag program has different criteria for decided when to
defrag a file. I believe this should be fixed by commit c7c539e8fd86d
in e2fsprogs, but that's not yet in a released version yet.
> Also am curious about test generic/026
>
> generic/026 [not run] ext4 does not define maximum ACL count
>
> Is that expected?
Yes; the test currently is only wired up for jfs and xfs. (See
xfstests/common/attr:_acl_get_max).
- Ted
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-11-13 23:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-11-13 21:16 xfstest generic/018 and ext4 defrag Steve French
2014-11-13 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2014-11-13 22:02 ` Theodore Ts'o
[not found] ` <CAH2r5ms6W1GQwzC2TFb87PK8UpPXmCWikQZEnWpw6aZQNdry7w@mail.gmail.com>
2014-11-13 23:38 ` Theodore Ts'o
2014-11-13 21:58 ` Theodore Ts'o
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).