Re: [PATCH] xfstests: make 275 xfs specific.

Eric Sandeen
2012-09-11T02:22:59Z

On 9/7/12 2:55 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 5/6/12 10:03 AM, Tao Ma wrote:
>> On 05/06/2012 07:37 AM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 11:07:09PM +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
>>>> From: Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>
>>>>
>>>> In my test with ext4, 275 can't pass because ext4
>>>> can create a 8k file in the end not like what xfs
>>>> does. So make this test case xfs only for now.
>>>
>>> It's not an XFS specific test - it's a test that is supposed to test
>>> POSIX write behaviour. i.e. if the filesystem is full, and then you
>>> free 4k of space, then an 8k write should only be able to write 4k,
>>> yes?
>> Yes, but it doesn't work as expected for ext4.
>
> Came across this thread again. I had patches on the list a while ago
> to fix it up.
>
> [PATCH V2] xfstests: make 275 pass
>
> But it never got fully reviewed or merged. :(

It's reviewed & merged now. Does it fix things for you? (I hope?)

-Eric

> -Eric
>
>>> So doesn't a failure on ext4 indicate that there's something wrong
>>> with ext4 (either it's ENOSPC detection or the short write
>>> handling), not the test?
>> Actually in my test, ext4 can create the file with 8K file size, not a
>> short write. I haven't looked into it yet. But AFAICS, if we have an
>> ext4 volume with 8k cluster size, a 4k file can occupy a 8k cluster and
>> the final write of 8k will succeed instead of the short write.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Tao
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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