From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q9TE8vS8170922 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2012 09:08:58 -0500 Message-ID: <508E8ECA.2080204@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 09:12:26 -0500 From: Rich Johnston MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: xfstests: test ext4 statfs References: <5089749C.4050003@redhat.com> <508AD066.4090102@sgi.com> <508AD8E8.1040301@redhat.com> <508E8480.5020507@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <508E8480.5020507@sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com, Eric Sandeen , ext4 development xfstests: test ext4 statfs Calculating free blocks in ext[234] is surprisingly hard, since by default we report "bsd" style df which doesn't count filesystem "overhead" blocks as used. With a lot of code dedicated to sorting out what to report as free, things tend to go wrong surprisingly often. Here's a test to actually try to stop the next regression. ;) NB: For bsddf, the kernel currently does not count journal blocks as overhead; it probably should. But the test below looks to have the result within 1% of perfection, so it still passes even if the kernel doesn't count the journal against free blocks. Eric, This patch has been committed to git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests, master branch, commit 0b2ab695. Thanks --Rich _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs