From: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@openvz.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Zheng Liu <gnehzuil.liu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ext4 xfstest regression due to ext4_es_lookup_extent
Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2013 13:37:06 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87txp3cqwt.fsf@openvz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130222180325.GB21264@thunk.org>
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 13:03:25 -0500, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 09:17:57PM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> >
> > 301'th xfstests are failed due to :
> > commit d100eef2440fea13e4f09e88b1c8bcbca64beb9f
> > Author: Zheng Liu <wenqing.lz@taobao.com>
> > Date: Mon Feb 18 00:29:59 2013 -0500
> >
> > ext4: lookup block mapping in extent status tree
> >
> > TESTCASE: https://github.com/dmonakhov/xfstests/commit/7b7efeee30a41109201e2040034e71db9b66ddc0
>
> Thanks for the heads up. I haven't updatied the xfstests I've been
> using yet, since I want to make sure I'm comparing apples and oranges
> during the merge window when I'm checking for regressions; I'll update
> my xfstests in a week or two after the merge window settles down, and
> then I'll rerun my baseline tests using the updated xfstests against
> 3.8.0 and 3.9-rc2 or 3.9-rc3.
>
> (And furthermore, these new xfstests aren't yet in xfstests upstream
> yet, right? Any comments from the xfstests maintainer about whether
> they are going to be willing to take your proposed new test cases?)
I hope so. I think i've fixed things according to Dave's commit.
> So when you say this is a regression, I take it that this test #301
> doesn't fail on commit d100eef2440f^, but it does fail on d100eef2440f,
> correct?
Correct. d100ee is the first bad commit which trigger BUGON()
But issue was introduced earlier es_cache was not updated
after extents was swapped between inodes.
I'll prepare patch soon.
Actually I think that the regression in 269'th you have found recently
caused by similar issue and commit which you foud by bisecting ( the one
which allow migration between indirect<->extent based inodes)
simply helps to spot real issue in es_caching code.
BUT my main idea is that we need robust self-testing infrastructure
similar one that we have at the time extents was introduced to ext4.
>
> - Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-23 9:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-22 17:17 ext4 xfstest regression due to ext4_es_lookup_extent Dmitry Monakhov
2013-02-22 18:03 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-02-23 9:37 ` Dmitry Monakhov [this message]
2013-02-23 10:00 ` Zheng Liu
2013-02-24 0:14 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-02-24 3:21 ` Zheng Liu
2013-02-26 23:18 ` [PATCH] jbd2: Fix ERR_PTR dereference in jbd2__journal_start Dmitry Monakhov
2013-03-02 22:10 ` Theodore Ts'o
2013-02-23 5:36 ` ext4 xfstest regression due to ext4_es_lookup_extent Zheng Liu
2013-02-24 14:58 ` Zheng Liu
2013-02-25 8:39 ` Dmitry Monakhov
2013-02-25 9:57 ` Zheng Liu
2013-02-26 20:06 ` Theodore Ts'o
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=87txp3cqwt.fsf@openvz.org \
--to=dmonakhov@openvz.org \
--cc=gnehzuil.liu@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).