From: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
To: coreutils@gnu.org
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: Files full of zeros with coreutils-8.11 and xfs (FIEMAP related?)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:02:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110414140222.GB1679@x4.trippels.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110414120635.GB1678@x4.trippels.de>
On 2011.04.14 at 14:53 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 14/04/11 14:48, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> > On 2011.04.14 at 14:34 +0100, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> >> Hi Markus,
> >>
> >> I noticed your fiemap issues here:
> >> http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/2011-April/050102.html
> >>
> >> FAIL: cp/fiemap-empty (exit: 1)
> >> ===============================
> >> ...
> >> + fallocate -l 10MiB -n unwritten.withdata
> >> + dd count=10 if=/dev/urandom conv=notrunc iflag=fullblock
> >> of=unwritten.withdata
> >> 10+0 records in
> >> 10+0 records out
> >> 5120 bytes (5.1 kB) copied, 0.00219578 s, 2.3 MB/s
> >> + cp unwritten.withdata cp.test
> >> ++ stat -c %s unwritten.withdata
> >> ++ stat -c %s cp.test
> >> + test 5120 = 5120
> >> + cmp unwritten.withdata cp.test
> >> unwritten.withdata cp.test differ: char 1, line 1
> >> + fail=1
> >>
> >> cp was changed in 8.11 to not bother reading
> >> an extent if it is marked as UNWRITTEN.
> >> The comment in fiemap.h says that this means that the
> >> space is allocated, but zero.
> >>
> >> We tested on XFS, on F15 x86_64, which is earlier
> >> than your 2.6.39-rc3 and didn't notice this issue.
> >>
> >> I'm guessing so that XFS is reporting the extent
> >> as UNWRITTEN, even though there is data in it now,
> >> and that it might sort itself out after a while,
> >> or after a sync I suppose (note we also stopped
> >> using sync before fiemap for 2.6.39).
> >>
> >> It would help a lot if you could insert this command
> >> into the test above (just before the failing cp)
> >> and show the test output again:
> >>
> >> filefrag -v unwritten.withdata
> >
> > Hi Pádraig,
> >
> > here you go:
> > + filefrag -v unwritten.withdata
> > Filesystem type is: ef53
> > File size of unwritten.withdata is 5120 (2 blocks, blocksize 4096)
> > ext logical physical expected length flags
> > 0 0 274432 2560 unwritten,eof
> > unwritten.withdata: 1 extent found
> >
> > Please notice that this also happens with ext4 on the same kernel.
> > Btrfs is fine.
>
> That looks like a bug in XFS :(
> I presume if you change `filefrag -v` to `filefrag -vs` that
> the output will change, and the test will pass.
> I'm a bit surprised that ext4 shows the same thing
> as there was supposedly a patch for this issue already
> applied for 2.6.39.
>
> It would be great if we got these fixed up before
> 2.6.29 was released, so that the checks in coreutils 8.11
> were valid.
You're right `filefrag -vs` fixes the issue on both xfs and ext4.
--
Markus
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-15 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-14 10:26 Files full of zeros with coreutils-8.11 and xfs (FIEMAP related?) Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-04-14 12:06 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-04-14 14:02 ` Markus Trippelsdorf [this message]
2011-04-14 14:59 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-04-14 15:50 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-14 15:52 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-04-14 15:56 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-14 16:03 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-04-14 16:14 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-14 16:21 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-14 16:28 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-04-14 16:31 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-14 16:48 ` Markus Trippelsdorf
2011-04-14 16:49 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-14 16:04 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-14 16:10 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-05-05 11:29 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-05-05 11:47 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-14 17:27 ` Jim Meyering
2011-04-14 19:13 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-04-14 19:39 ` Jim Meyering
2011-04-14 22:59 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-14 23:29 ` Pádraig Brady
2011-04-15 0:09 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-15 5:01 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-04-16 0:50 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-16 5:11 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-04-16 12:21 ` Theodore Tso
2011-04-18 0:40 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-18 2:45 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-04-19 1:58 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-19 2:59 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-04-19 3:05 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-21 20:12 ` Jim Meyering
2011-04-19 3:30 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-19 4:14 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-19 5:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-19 3:44 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-19 6:53 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-19 7:45 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-19 8:11 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-19 14:05 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-19 14:09 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-04-19 14:13 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-19 16:01 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-04-20 1:53 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-20 15:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-20 17:21 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-04-19 21:08 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-20 15:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-16 6:05 ` Yongqiang Yang
2011-04-18 0:35 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-15 8:53 ` Jim Meyering
2011-04-15 17:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-15 17:24 ` Eric Blake
2011-04-15 17:26 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-04-15 22:28 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-04-16 0:25 ` Dave Chinner
2011-04-14 14:39 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-04-20 14:39 ` Jim Meyering
2011-04-21 20:01 ` Jim Meyering
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=20110414140222.GB1679@x4.trippels.de \
--to=markus@trippelsdorf.de \
--cc=coreutils@gnu.org \
--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