From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, Akshay Lal <alal@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Test to ensure that the EOFBLOCK_FL gets set/unset correctly.
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 19:23:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C785710.9070405@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100828001703.GK705@dastard>
Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 07:03:32PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Dave Chinner wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure this really is a generic test - it's testing an ext4
>>> specific bug. We've got other generic tests that exercise fallocate,
>>> and some filesystems (like XFS) don't have special bits to say there
>>> are extents beyond EOF and checking a filesystem repeated won't
>>> report any problems. So perhaps if should be '_supported_fs ext4'
>>
>> Oops we're giving conflicting advice :) I thought a test that
>> exercises blocks-past-eof-filling at various boundaries made
>> sense in general, even if the specific regression test is ext4-specific.
>>
>> Seems like at least ocfs2/btrfs might benefit from the basic exercise,
>> so I was recommending that it be generic.
>
> Ok, that seems reasonable. If the bug results in filesystem
> corruption, then maybe just relying on the check at the end of the
> test to fail it would be appropriate?
That's fine by me, if e2fsck will squawk, that's enough.
-Eric
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-28 0:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-27 20:33 [PATCH] Test to ensure that the EOFBLOCK_FL gets set/unset correctly. As found by Theodore Ts'o: If a 128K file is falloc'ed using the KEEP_SIZE flag, and then write exactly 128K, the EOFBLOCK_FL doesn't get cleared correctly. This forces e2fsck to complain about that inode Akshay Lal
2010-08-27 21:49 ` [PATCH] Test to ensure that the EOFBLOCK_FL gets set/unset correctly Eric Sandeen
2010-08-27 23:10 ` Akshay Lal
2010-08-27 23:23 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-08-27 23:32 ` [PATCH] Test to ensure that the EOFBLOCK_FL gets set/unset correctly. As found by Theodore Ts'o: If a 128K file is falloc'ed using the KEEP_SIZE flag, and then write exactly 128K, the EOFBLOCK_FL doesn't get cleared correctly. This forces e2fsck to complain about that inode Dave Chinner
2010-08-28 0:03 ` [PATCH] Test to ensure that the EOFBLOCK_FL gets set/unset correctly Eric Sandeen
2010-08-28 0:17 ` Dave Chinner
2010-08-28 0:23 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2010-08-30 17:33 ` Akshay Lal
2010-09-07 18:23 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-07 19:58 ` Akshay Lal
2010-09-08 18:51 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-08 18:52 ` Akshay Lal
2010-09-08 19:11 ` Eric Sandeen
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=4C785710.9070405@sandeen.net \
--to=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=alal@google.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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