From: John Garry <john.g.garry@oracle.com>
To: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@linux.ibm.com>, Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
djwong@kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/12] ltp/fsx.c: Add atomic writes support to fsx
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 11:33:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <66470caf-ec35-4f7d-adac-4a1c22a40a3e@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aOPCAzx0diQy7lFN@li-dc0c254c-257c-11b2-a85c-98b6c1322444.ibm.com>
On 06/10/2025 14:20, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote:
> Hi Zorro, thanks for checking this. So correct me if im wrong but I
> understand that you have run this test on an atomic writes enabled
> kernel where the stack also supports atomic writes.
>
> Looking at the bad data log:
>
> +READ BAD DATA: offset = 0x1c000, size = 0x1803, fname = /mnt/xfstests/test/junk
> +OFFSET GOOD BAD RANGE
> +0x1c000 0x0000 0xcdcd 0x0
> +operation# (mod 256) for the bad data may be 205
>
> We see that 0x0000 was expected but we got 0xcdcd. Now the operation
> that caused this is indicated to be 205, but looking at that operation:
>
> +205(205 mod 256): ZERO 0x6dbe6 thru 0x6e6aa (0xac5 bytes)
>
> This doesn't even overlap the range that is bad. (0x1c000 to 0x1c00f).
> Infact, it does seem like an unlikely coincidence that the actual data
> in the bad range is 0xcdcd which is something xfs_io -c "pwrite" writes
> to default (fsx writes random data in even offsets and operation num in
> odd).
>
> I am able to replicate this but only on XFS but not on ext4 (atleast not
> in 20 runs). I'm trying to better understand if this is a test issue or
> not. Will keep you update.
Hi Ojaswin,
Sorry for the very slow response.
Are you still checking this issue?
To replicate, should I just take latest xfs kernel and run this series
on top of latest xfstests? Is it 100% reproducible?
Thanks,
John
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-20 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-19 6:47 [PATCH v7 00/11] Add more tests for multi fs block atomic writes Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:47 ` [PATCH v7 01/12] common/rc: Add _min() and _max() helpers Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:47 ` [PATCH v7 02/12] common/rc: Add fio atomic write helpers Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 16:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-09-19 6:47 ` [PATCH v7 03/12] common/rc: Add a helper to run fsx on a given file Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:47 ` [PATCH v7 04/12] ltp/fsx.c: Add atomic writes support to fsx Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-28 8:55 ` Zorro Lang
2025-09-28 13:19 ` Zorro Lang
2025-10-02 17:56 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-03 17:19 ` Zorro Lang
2025-10-05 12:57 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-05 15:39 ` Zorro Lang
2025-10-06 13:20 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-07 9:58 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-17 16:01 ` Zorro Lang
2025-10-17 16:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-17 18:47 ` Zorro Lang
2025-10-17 22:52 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-20 10:33 ` John Garry [this message]
2025-10-21 10:28 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-21 11:30 ` Brian Foster
2025-10-21 11:58 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-21 17:44 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-10-22 7:40 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-23 15:44 ` John Garry
2025-10-23 17:55 ` Darrick J. Wong
2025-09-19 6:47 ` [PATCH v7 05/12] generic: Add atomic write test using fio crc check verifier Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-10-28 9:42 ` Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-11-01 9:00 ` Zorro Lang
2025-09-19 6:47 ` [PATCH v7 06/12] generic: Add atomic write test using fio verify on file mixed mappings Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:48 ` [PATCH v7 07/12] generic: Add atomic write multi-fsblock O_[D]SYNC tests Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:48 ` [PATCH v7 08/12] generic: Stress fsx with atomic writes enabled Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:48 ` [PATCH v7 09/12] generic: Add sudden shutdown tests for multi block atomic writes Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:48 ` [PATCH v7 10/12] ext4: Test atomic write and ioend codepaths with bigalloc Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:48 ` [PATCH v7 11/12] ext4: Test atomic writes allocation and write " Ojaswin Mujoo
2025-09-19 6:48 ` [PATCH v7 12/12] ext4: Atomic write test for extent split across leaf nodes Ojaswin Mujoo
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=66470caf-ec35-4f7d-adac-4a1c22a40a3e@oracle.com \
--to=john.g.garry@oracle.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ojaswin@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=zlang@redhat.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).