From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D27B7F6F for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 17:42:32 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5969B8F8037 for ; Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:42:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id ypfTla1USai935pK for ; Wed, 01 Oct 2014 15:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 08:41:55 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: Test xfs/287 failure Message-ID: <20141001224155.GW4758@dastard> References: <20141001152314.GH17405@quack.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20141001152314.GH17405@quack.suse.cz> 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: Jan Kara Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 05:23:14PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > Hello, > > so after installing latest xfsdump (just pulled git repo at oss.sgi.com), > I'm getting failure in test xfs/287. The failure is: > xfs/287 2s ... 2s > _check_xfs_filesystem: filesystem on /dev/vdb2 is inconsistent (r) (see > /var/lib/xfstests/results//xfs/287.full) > > And the 287.full has: > ... > Phase 3 - for each AG... > - scan (but don't clear) agi unlinked lists... > - process known inodes and perform inode discovery... > - agno = 0 > directory flags set on non-directory inode 133 > directory flags set on non-directory inode 134 > directory flags set on non-directory inode 133 > would fix bad flags. > directory flags set on non-directory inode 134 > would fix bad flags. > ... > > Complete file is attached. I'm using also the latest xfsprogs from git and > kernel 3.17.0-rc5 (plus couple of my patches but these should have no > influence). It's a bug, but a minor inconvenience at worst. I sent patches to fix this a couple of days ago: http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-09/msg00510.html $ sudo ./check xfs/287 FSTYP -- xfs (debug) PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 test4 3.17.0-rc7-dgc+ MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -bsize=4096 /dev/ram1 MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/ram1 /mnt/scr xfs/287 1s ... 1s Ran: xfs/287 Passed all 1 tests $ -Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs