From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A47A7F72 for ; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 16:35:34 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34C2C304043 for ; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 14:35:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id KO5xWrtoW9Sn2xLm for ; Sun, 02 Feb 2014 14:35:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 09:35:25 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] xfstests updated to 197f773 Message-ID: <20140202223525.GW2212@dastard> References: <20140124025846.GL27606@dastard> <52E95EB8.8080003@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52E95EB8.8080003@sandeen.net> 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: Alex Lyakas , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 02:04:08PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 1/29/14, 1:55 PM, Alex Lyakas wrote: > > Hi Dave, > > are all tests in xfstests (those relevant for XFS) in principle > > supposed to pass on XFS? > > I am running these tests on a pristine XFS from kernel 3.8.13 > > (srcversion 9862FA08CF42E06A4151111) and I get: > > > > root@vc-13-12-1095-35-dev:/mnt/work/alex/xfstests# ./check tests/generic/013 > > FSTYP -- xfs (non-debug) > > PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 vc-13-12-1095-35-dev 3.8.13-030813-generic > > MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -bsize=4096 /dev/vdb > > MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/vdb /mnt/SCRATCH_DIR > > > > generic/013 34s > > _check_xfs_filesystem: filesystem on /dev/vda is inconsistent (c) (see > > /mnt/work/alex/xfstests/results//generic/013.full) > > uh, so it failed > > > Ran: generic/013 > > Passed all 1 tests > > but it passed? ;) It passed the test, but failed the post test filesystem checks. > The fact that you saw: > > > generic/013 34s > > and not: > > > generic/013 34s ... 33s > or > > generic/013 34s ... output mismatch > > or similar, makes me think the test did not even start, and /dev/vda was > corrupted before you even started the test, but I'm not certain. No, what that means is that there was no results/check.time file that had previous runtime information in it. i.e. this is the first time the test was run, or that it has always failed like this in the past on this machine. As it is: http://xfs.org/index.php/XFS_FAQ#Q:_What_information_should_I_include_when_reporting_a_problem.3F Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs