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 0EDF97CA0 for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 04:09:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D322F304039 for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 02:09:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id WhyYrHlzy0UQVoyt (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 25 Jun 2016 02:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 17:09:08 +0800 From: Eryu Guan Subject: Re: Some xfstests failures on non-crc xfs with latest xfsprogs (v4.5.0-rc1) Message-ID: <20160625090908.GE23649@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> References: <20160304112354.GX11419@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> <727b405b-7df2-641a-d4d0-24333e003374@sandeen.net> <20160625044410.GD23649@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> 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: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 12:21:26AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > On Jun 24, 2016, at 11:44 PM, Eryu Guan wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 05:37:10PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >>> On 3/4/16 5:23 AM, Eryu Guan wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> I noticed some xfstests failures while testing v4 XFS with latest > >>> v4.5.0-rc1 xfsprogs on v4.5-rc6 kernel, and all these failures are gone > >>> if I use v3.2.4 xfsprogs, or if test on v5 XFS. > >>> > >>> So either xfstests needs update or xfsprogs breaks something for non-crc > >>> XFS. But I'm not sure which is which, so I post them out for broader > >>> review. > >>> > >>> (All tests are checked with 'MKFS_OPTIONS="-m crc=0" ./check ') > >> > >> Eryu, sorry you didn't get a reply on this in March. We should have > >> listened! ;) The patches I sent in the pat day or two should > > > > Thanks for looking at them! :) > > > >> fix some of these ... > >> > >>> == 1. xfs/032 fsck failure (xfs_db check) on ppc64 host == > >> > >> but not this one. Do you still see this? > > > > My recent test with 4.7-rc4 kernel and latest xfsprogs (June 22nd) shows > > xfs/032 passed on ppc64 host. But I'll retest to be sure. > > I wasn't thinking. Brian's recent sparse inode patches fix this one. Confirmed xfsprogs v4.7-rc1 passed the test. And xfs/244 is not ppc-specific, x86_64 fails it either. I think your patch could fix it as well. Thanks, Eryu _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs