From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Cc: Chandan Rajendra <chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
fstests@vger.kernel.org, guaneryu@gmail.com,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 01/19] Fix xfs/009 to work with 64k block size
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 23:18:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180918031830.GA15708@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180917225925.GE4635@magnolia>
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 03:59:25PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
>
> Hm. Certain filesystems draw a distinction between the fundamental
> block size and the minimum file block mapping size. ocfs2 supports
> having a file cluster size (mkfs.ocfs2 -C) that is greater than the fs
> block size, and (I think) xfs can achieve something similar for files on
> a realtime device via the mkfs.xfs -r extsize= option.
>
> If you're dealing with writing things into a file for a test, I think
> you have to use _get_file_block_size to make sure that you don't fall
> afoul of the cluster/block difference. I don't know if you've checked
> that for this patch series...?
>
> (Granted, I suspect that many tests have been sloppy about this...)
Indeed, we have a number of failures in ext4 bigalloc which are
because of this block size vs. cluster size difference. IIRC, a while
back Eric Whitney had tried to start a discussion about how to best
deal with this issue, but it wasn't clear what was the right way to
add the necessary infrastructure to xfstests. I had assumed it was an
ext4-only problem, and no one had time to try to come up with a
solution.
As far as I know, we still don't have any general infrastructure to
support this in xfstests. Is this correct, or am I missing something?
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-18 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-12 6:26 [PATCH V3 00/19] Fix tests to work on non-4k block sized fs instances Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 01/19] Fix xfs/009 to work with 64k block size Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-17 22:59 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-09-18 3:18 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o [this message]
2018-09-18 3:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-09-18 6:02 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-18 14:36 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 02/19] xfs/050: Fix "Push past soft inode limit" case Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 03/19] Fix xfs/050 to work with 64k block size Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 04/19] Fix xfs/074 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 05/19] Fix xfs/127 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 06/19] Fix xfs/139 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-17 22:29 ` Darrick J. Wong
2018-09-18 8:46 ` Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 07/19] Fix xfs/140 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 08/19] Fix xfs/190 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 09/19] Fix xfs/299 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 10/19] xfs/325: Inject free_extent error after CoW operation Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 11/19] Fix generic/102 to work with 64k block size Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 12/19] Fix generic/172 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 13/19] Filter fiemap output by FS " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 14/19] Fix generic/177 to work with 64k " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 15/19] Fix generic/230 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 16/19] Fix generic/235 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 17/19] Fix generic/459 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 18/19] Fix generic/018 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-12 6:26 ` [PATCH V3 19/19] Fix generic/108 " Chandan Rajendra
2018-09-18 5:20 ` [PATCH V3 00/19] Fix tests to work on non-4k block sized fs instances Zorro Lang
2018-09-18 10:28 ` Chandan Rajendra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180918031830.GA15708@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=chandan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=guaneryu@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).