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 6F0977D1C for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 12:08:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F58304039 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 10:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from userp1040.oracle.com (userp1040.oracle.com [156.151.31.81]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id a7fKUfYGCgLlI5pw (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 01 Aug 2016 10:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 10:08:15 -0700 From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/17] xfs: run xfs_repair at the end of each test Message-ID: <20160801170814.GA8590@birch.djwong.org> References: <146914477514.11762.3144320628851923350.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <146914481474.11762.2741429828012981240.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <20160801062719.GH596@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160801062719.GH596@infradead.org> 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, eguan@redhat.com, fstests@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 11:27:19PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 04:46:54PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > Run xfs_repair twice at the end of each test -- once to rebuild > > the btree indices, and again with -n to check the rebuild work. > > This looks fine to me in general, but shouldn't we have specific > tests that test the rebuilding in a normal auto run? We do have specific tests that examine the outputs of rebuilding the indices (all the fuzzer group tests do this too); this patch enables a test runner to expand that coverage to all tests. Running a rebuilding xfs_repair for all the tests shook out some bugs in the xfs_repair rmap handling code that only triggered under some of the non-rmap non-reflink stressor tests. --D _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs