From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p9RG4dbD104220 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 11:04:39 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 16C301CC256B for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 6W7nLVWSxjcrmlUK for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2011 09:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 12:04:34 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests 016: Do not discard blocks at the mkfs time Message-ID: <20111027160434.GA21551@infradead.org> References: <1319625983.3074.28.camel@dhcp-26-208.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1319625983.3074.28.camel@dhcp-26-208.brq.redhat.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Boris Ranto Cc: Eric Sandeen , xfs On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:46:23PM +0200, Boris Ranto wrote: > The test 016 fills scratch device with some data and then creates xfs fs > on the scratch device. Later, the test assumes that the previously > written data are still in there and checks for them at specific > locations. On ssd drive this will lead to failure since the blocks are > discarded by default when the mkfs command is run. > This simple patch that adds -K to stop the discarding (if the mkfs > command supports it) fixed the issue for me: > > Signed-off-by: Boris Ranto > > diff --git a/016 b/016 > index 9275ade..db76398 100755 > --- a/016 > +++ b/016 > @@ -65,6 +65,8 @@ _init() > $here/src/devzero -b 2048 -n 50 -v 198 $SCRATCH_DEV > echo "*** mkfs" > force_opts="-dsize=50m -lsize=$log_size" > + # Do not discard blocks, we need them for further reads > + _scratch_mkfs_xfs -N -K $force_opts >/dev/null 2>&1 && > force_opts="-K $force_opts" > echo mkfs_xfs $force_opts $SCRATCH_DEV >>$seq.full > _scratch_mkfs_xfs $force_opts >$tmp.mkfs0 2>&1 It took me very long understanding why you do mkfs.xfs calls here, but I suspect now that it is to detect if -K is supported? If so please document it in a comment, and maybe also write the code a bit more verbose, e.g. # # Do not discard blocks as we check for patterns in freespace. # # Given that older xfsprogs versions do not have the -K option # make sure it works first. # if _scratch_mkfs_xfs -N -K $force_opts >/dev/null 2>&1; then force_opts="-K $force_opts" fi Otherwise the test looks good and will fix the 016 failure on TP / TRIM capable devices that I've been seeing for a while. Thanks a lot for doing this! _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs