From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B6527F37 for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 15:30:43 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 290C8AC003 for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 13:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dkim2.fusionio.com (dkim2.fusionio.com [66.114.96.54]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id WunhPYSCXcvYhDgm (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 13:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.fusionio.com (unknown [10.101.1.160]) by dkim2.fusionio.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1FE39A03DC for ; Thu, 16 May 2013 14:30:37 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 16:30:35 -0400 From: Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: 311: fsck the dmflakey device instead of the real device V2 Message-ID: <20130516203035.GE1765@localhost.localdomain> References: <1368631217-15511-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fusionio.com> <5194E764.6030207@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5194E764.6030207@sgi.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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Rich Johnston Cc: Josef Bacik , "xfs@oss.sgi.com" On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 08:04:20AM -0600, Rich Johnston wrote: > On 05/15/2013 10:20 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: > > Dave pointed out that xfs was having issues with 311 because of caching issues. > > He suggested that I fsck the dm-flakey device to make sure we don't have this > > problem. Make _check_scratch_fs take an optional argument to use as the device > > to fsck. Thanks, > > > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik > > --- > Hi Josef, > > Looks like it fails test 19 , are we supposed to see failures for ext4 > and xfs? > Yeah that's what I was seeing, if you run the fsync tester without the reboot option and look at the file itself it should match the md5sum thats in the good output. Thanks, Josef _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs