From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q0ULMvQf135418 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:22:57 -0600 Received: from mail.sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id s1zpeGIJznMstPEw for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:22:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4F270A2F.10601@sandeen.net> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:22:55 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Question on xfstest 274 References: <4F230E62.8020004@sandeen.net> <4F2603CC.9080807@cn.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <4F2603CC.9080807@cn.fujitsu.com> 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 Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: WuBo Cc: xfs-oss On 1/29/12 8:43 PM, WuBo wrote: > On 01/28/2012 04:51 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Hi, I was wondering if you could describe your intent for 274 just a little more. >> >> The test says: >> >> # preallocation test >> >> but that is the only comment other than copyright. ;) > > Maybe the comment is too simple :) > >> >> I see that it does: >> >> # Make a 1G fs >> # Create a single 4k file >> # Allocate 1M past the EOF on that file >> # Completely fill remaining space, using 2 other files >> # Write 8k past EOF on the original file which has blocks past EOF >> >> but I am not certain what you are testing. I presume that >> you are testing the fact that the 1M past EOF should be truncated, >> freeing up space, and allowing the 8k write to succeed? >> Is that right? > > Actually I write 8K at the end of 4K(seek=1), and what I want to test > is the 8K-write should be succeed because the preallocation 1M. At the > mean while, the file should not be truncated. Ah, right - I missed the conv=notrunc sorry. Ok, that all makes sense. I think I will try to clean up the test just a bit. Thanks, -Eric > Thanks, > wubo > >> >> However, at least on ext4 I noticed that the "fill the fs" >> stage does not succeed; perhaps that should be tested as well. >> >> I can do some similar work on this like I did for 275, but I need >> to be sure I understand your original intent for the test, first. >> >> Thanks, >> -Eric >> > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs