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 A38647F76 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 19:44:26 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 858C3304043 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 17:44:26 -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 btKwBsCqRJWFne80 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 17:44:24 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 12:44:16 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add regression test for btrfs incremental send Message-ID: <20140217014416.GB13997@dastard> References: <1392408522-764-1-git-send-email-fdmanana@gmail.com> <1392596438-6509-1-git-send-email-fdmanana@gmail.com> <20140217011929.GA13997@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Filipe David Manana Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" , "xfs@oss.sgi.com" On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 01:36:02AM +0000, Filipe David Manana wrote: > On Monday, February 17, 2014, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 12:20:38AM +0000, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote: > > > Test for a btrfs incremental send issue where we end up sending a > > > wrong section of data from a file extent if the corresponding file > > > extent is compressed and the respective file extent item has a non > > > zero data offset. > > > > > > Fixed by the following linux kernel btrfs patch: > > > > > > Btrfs: use right clone root offset for compressed extents > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana > > > > > > --- > > > > > > V2: Made the test more reliable. Now it doesn't depend anymore of btrfs' > > > hole punch implementation leaving hole file extent items when we > > punch > > > beyond the file's current size. > > > V3: Filter xfs_io output and make less use of the run_check function, as > > > suggested by Dave Chinner. > > > > Awesome. Thanks for the quick turn around. > > > > > common/rc | 5 +++ > > > tests/btrfs/040 | 119 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > tests/btrfs/040.out | 9 ++++ > > > tests/btrfs/group | 1 + > > > 4 files changed, 134 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100755 tests/btrfs/040 > > > create mode 100644 tests/btrfs/040.out > > > > > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > > > index e91568b..27be009 100644 > > > --- a/common/rc > > > +++ b/common/rc > > > @@ -2207,6 +2207,11 @@ run_check() > > > "$@" >> $seqres.full 2>&1 || _fail "failed: '$@'" > > > } > > > > > > +_run_btrfs_util_prog() > > > +{ > > > + run_check $BTRFS_UTIL_PROG $* > > > +} > > > > Can you do a cleanup of all the other btrfs tests that can use this? > > > Ok. I just did that for all the test cases not yet merged, as you probably > noticed already. Yes, I did ;) > For the ones already in the repository, I'll see if I can do it soon this > coming week. Great! Thanks for doing this. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs