* [PATCH, RFC] jfs support for xfstests
@ 2011-07-29 15:50 Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-29 16:03 ` [Jfs-discussion] " Dave Kleikamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2011-07-29 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jfs-discussion, xfs
The patch below adds basic jfs support to xfstests. Unfortunately it
doesn't get very far, as test 001 already blows up with a kernel crash,
as do 011 and 013 as other random picks.
Index: xfstests-dev/common.rc
===================================================================
--- xfstests-dev.orig/common.rc 2011-07-29 15:36:52.000000000 +0000
+++ xfstests-dev/common.rc 2011-07-29 15:39:41.000000000 +0000
@@ -102,6 +102,9 @@ _mkfs_opts()
gfs2)
export MKFS_OPTIONS="$GFS2_MKFS_OPTIONS -O -p lock_nolock"
;;
+ jfs)
+ export MKFS_OPTIONS="$JFS_MKFS_OPTIONS -q"
+ ;;
*)
;;
esac
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [Jfs-discussion] [PATCH, RFC] jfs support for xfstests
2011-07-29 15:50 [PATCH, RFC] jfs support for xfstests Christoph Hellwig
@ 2011-07-29 16:03 ` Dave Kleikamp
2011-08-01 18:29 ` [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes Dave Kleikamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Kleikamp @ 2011-07-29 16:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: jfs-discussion, xfs
On 07/29/2011 10:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> The patch below adds basic jfs support to xfstests. Unfortunately it
> doesn't get very far, as test 001 already blows up with a kernel crash,
> as do 011 and 013 as other random picks.
Great :-)
Seems to be a good idea to support jfs. I'll carve out some time to
reproduce and debug the crashes.
Thanks,
Shaggy
>
>
> Index: xfstests-dev/common.rc
> ===================================================================
> --- xfstests-dev.orig/common.rc 2011-07-29 15:36:52.000000000 +0000
> +++ xfstests-dev/common.rc 2011-07-29 15:39:41.000000000 +0000
> @@ -102,6 +102,9 @@ _mkfs_opts()
> gfs2)
> export MKFS_OPTIONS="$GFS2_MKFS_OPTIONS -O -p lock_nolock"
> ;;
> + jfs)
> + export MKFS_OPTIONS="$JFS_MKFS_OPTIONS -q"
> + ;;
> *)
> ;;
> esac
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes
2011-07-29 16:03 ` [Jfs-discussion] " Dave Kleikamp
@ 2011-08-01 18:29 ` Dave Kleikamp
2011-08-01 18:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Kleikamp @ 2011-08-01 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: jfs-discussion, xfs
On 07/29/2011 11:03 AM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On 07/29/2011 10:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> The patch below adds basic jfs support to xfstests. Unfortunately it
>> doesn't get very far, as test 001 already blows up with a kernel crash,
>> as do 011 and 013 as other random picks.
>
> Great :-)
>
> Seems to be a good idea to support jfs. I'll carve out some time to
> reproduce and debug the crashes.
This fixes a race during unmount. We need to not only make sure that
the journal is completely written, but that the metadata changes make
it to disk before releasing ipimap and ipbmap.
Signed-off-by: Dave Kleikamp <dave.kleikamp@oracle.com>
---
fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c b/fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c
index adcf92d..7971f37 100644
--- a/fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c
+++ b/fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c
@@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ int jfs_umount(struct super_block *sb)
/*
* Wait for outstanding transactions to be written to log:
*/
- jfs_flush_journal(log, 1);
+ jfs_flush_journal(log, 2);
/*
* close fileset inode allocation map (aka fileset inode)
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ int jfs_umount_rw(struct super_block *sb)
*
* remove file system from log active file system list.
*/
- jfs_flush_journal(log, 1);
+ jfs_flush_journal(log, 2);
/*
* Make sure all metadata makes it to disk
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes
2011-08-01 18:29 ` [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes Dave Kleikamp
@ 2011-08-01 18:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-01 20:04 ` Dave Kleikamp
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2011-08-01 18:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Kleikamp; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, jfs-discussion, xfs
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:29:26PM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> On 07/29/2011 11:03 AM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> > On 07/29/2011 10:50 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> The patch below adds basic jfs support to xfstests. Unfortunately it
> >> doesn't get very far, as test 001 already blows up with a kernel crash,
> >> as do 011 and 013 as other random picks.
> >
> > Great :-)
> >
> > Seems to be a good idea to support jfs. I'll carve out some time to
> > reproduce and debug the crashes.
>
> This fixes a race during unmount. We need to not only make sure that
> the journal is completely written, but that the metadata changes make
> it to disk before releasing ipimap and ipbmap.
Looks sensible. How far does a ./check -g auto get now? Any other
failures?
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes
2011-08-01 18:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
@ 2011-08-01 20:04 ` Dave Kleikamp
2011-08-02 10:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dave Kleikamp @ 2011-08-01 20:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: jfs-discussion, xfs
On 08/01/2011 01:32 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:29:26PM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
>> On 07/29/2011 11:03 AM, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
>> This fixes a race during unmount. We need to not only make sure that
>> the journal is completely written, but that the metadata changes make
>> it to disk before releasing ipimap and ipbmap.
>
> Looks sensible. How far does a ./check -g auto get now? Any other
> failures?
It runs through them all. A lot of tests get skipped claiming not to be
supported on jfs. A failure because jfs doesn't support fallocate and
hole-punch, but no crashes.
Shaggy
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes
2011-08-01 20:04 ` Dave Kleikamp
@ 2011-08-02 10:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2011-08-02 10:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Kleikamp; +Cc: jfs-discussion, xfs
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 03:04:32PM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote:
> It runs through them all. A lot of tests get skipped claiming not to be
> supported on jfs. A failure because jfs doesn't support fallocate and
> hole-punch, but no crashes.
Looks like the fallocate feature tests are broken, I'll look into fixing
it.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-08-02 10:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-07-29 15:50 [PATCH, RFC] jfs support for xfstests Christoph Hellwig
2011-07-29 16:03 ` [Jfs-discussion] " Dave Kleikamp
2011-08-01 18:29 ` [PATCH] jfs: flush journal completely before releasing metadata inodes Dave Kleikamp
2011-08-01 18:32 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-08-01 20:04 ` Dave Kleikamp
2011-08-02 10:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox