From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Cc: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/10] xfs: add XFS_IOC_FREE_EOFBLOCKS ioctl
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 12:39:01 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121016013901.GI2739@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121015234902.GH2739@dastard>
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:49:02AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:46:26PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote:
> > Hey Brian,
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 06:35:14PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > On 10/11/2012 10:13 AM, Ben Myers wrote:
> > > > Hey Brian,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 10:17:12AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote:
> > > >> The XFS_IOC_FREE_EOFBLOCKS ioctl allows users to invoke an EOFBLOCKS
> > > >> scan. The xfs_eofblocks structure is defined to support the command
> > > >> parameters (scan mode).
> > > >
> > > > It would help to have an xfstest to exercise this ioctl to pull in with this
> > > > series. Do you have any code that could be wrangled into a test case?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, makes sense. I have some very basic test code I could put somewhere
> > > to invoke the ioctl(). One of the questions I've been meaning to ask is
> > > whether it would be relevant for that code to live in a common tool,
> > > such as adding a new command to xfs_io. Then perhaps create an xfstests
> > > test using that. Thoughts?
> >
> > IMO you are right on the mark. xfs_io is a great place for this.
> >
> > > FYI, I have a few other things on my plate at the moment so
> > > unfortunately it will be a bit before I can get back to XFS work... But
> > > I'm fine with the set pending until I can come up with some test
> > > coverage if that is preferable, of course.
> >
> > I do think it is preferable to have a test case go in with the code where
> > possible. Since you don't mind waiting a bit, that seems to be the way to go.
> > The other option could be to look for a volunteer to work on the test. ;)
>
> FWIW, given the background cleanup code can be trivially verified to
> work (open, apend, close, repeat, wait 5 minutes) and is the
> functionality that is needed in mainline, having something to test
> the ioctls should not stop the patchset from being merged.
i.e.:
$ for i in `seq 0 512`; do
> xfs_io -f -c "pwrite $((i * 4096)) 4096" /mnt/scratch/foo
> done
$ stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
8192
$ sync; stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
8192
$ sleep 30; stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
8192
$ sleep 300; stat -c %b /mnt/scratch/foo
4104
It works. ;)
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-16 1:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-05 14:17 [PATCH v5 00/10] speculative preallocation inode tracking Brian Foster
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 01/10] xfs: add EOFBLOCKS inode tagging/untagging Brian Foster
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] xfs: support a tag-based inode_ag_iterator Brian Foster
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 03/10] xfs: create helper to check whether to free eofblocks on inode Brian Foster
2012-10-23 0:58 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] xfs: make xfs_free_eofblocks() non-static, return EAGAIN on trylock failure Brian Foster
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 05/10] xfs: create function to scan and clear EOFBLOCKS inodes Brian Foster
2012-10-23 1:01 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 06/10] xfs: add XFS_IOC_FREE_EOFBLOCKS ioctl Brian Foster
2012-10-11 14:13 ` Ben Myers
2012-10-11 22:35 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-15 22:46 ` Ben Myers
2012-10-15 23:49 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-16 1:39 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2012-10-17 22:40 ` Ben Myers
2012-10-18 12:16 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-18 15:46 ` Ben Myers
2012-10-18 16:23 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-22 7:34 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-22 13:23 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-22 22:22 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-23 1:31 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-24 16:16 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-24 19:27 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 07/10] xfs: make xfs_quota_type() non-static Brian Foster
2012-10-23 1:31 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 08/10] xfs: add quota id filtering to eofblocks scan Brian Foster
2012-10-23 1:42 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-24 16:18 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-24 19:41 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-24 23:02 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-25 0:02 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-25 0:29 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 09/10] xfs: add minimum file size " Brian Foster
2012-10-23 1:43 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-05 14:17 ` [PATCH v5 10/10] xfs: add background scanning to clear eofblocks inodes Brian Foster
2012-10-23 1:55 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-19 21:02 ` [PATCH v5 00/10] speculative preallocation inode tracking Mark Tinguely
2012-10-21 14:00 ` Brian Foster
2012-10-21 17:53 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-10-21 20:31 ` Mark Tinguely
2012-10-21 22:28 ` Dave Chinner
2012-10-23 19:10 ` Ben Myers
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=20121016013901.GI2739@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=bfoster@redhat.com \
--cc=bpm@sgi.com \
--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