From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 11 May 2008 23:46:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m4C6kY3O003484 for ; Sun, 11 May 2008 23:46:36 -0700 Message-ID: <4827E7F4.7010706@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 16:47:16 +1000 From: Timothy Shimmin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: review: log_filter.patch 018,081,082 pv#981362 References: <48227ef3.WIWE0hYubr4nS8cD%tes@sgi.com> <20080512064115.GF155679365@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20080512064115.GF155679365@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: David Chinner Cc: xfs-dev@sgi.com, xfs@oss.sgi.com David Chinner wrote: > On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 02:17:55PM +1000, tes@sgi.com wrote: >> Due to the changes for default mkfs options where we now have >> version 2 inodes, we no longer update the di_onlink field. >> To be consistent with previous output, we filter these values out. >> Also, as part of changes to the inode generation number which uses >> a random num generator, we need to filter out the gen# too. >> >> --Tim >> >> 018.op.irix | 400 +++++++++++------------ >> 018.op.linux | 400 +++++++++++------------ >> 018.trans_inode | 800 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ >> 081.ugquota.trans_inode | 816 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ >> 082.op.irix | 400 +++++++++++------------ >> 082.op.linux | 400 +++++++++++------------ >> 082.trans_inode | 800 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------ >> common.log | 3 >> 8 files changed, 2011 insertions(+), 2008 deletions(-) > > Worth noting is that these tests all still fail on a config that > corrects a problem with the superblock features2 field on mount. > > Probably not worth bothering about - but I thought I'd mention it > as updating the tests didn't fix the failure on my machine. Updating > xfsprogs now.... > > Cheers, > > Dave. :-) Yeah, I had the same failure until I updated mkfs. I had an extra SB_UNIT sb buffer transaction at the start of the log for the features2 correction. I didn't think it was worth bothering about for that interim scenario. --Tim