From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id qAFMOlU6032591 for ; Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:24:47 -0600 Message-ID: <50A56C2A.5000805@sgi.com> Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:26:50 -0600 From: Mark Tinguely MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/32 V2] xfs: verify dquot blocks as they are read from disk References: <1352721264-3700-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1352721264-3700-18-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <20121114065013.GE1710@dastard> <50A52CA3.3060604@sgi.com> <20121115204830.GG14281@dastard> <50A5583D.5070101@sgi.com> <20121115211608.GI14281@dastard> <50A55FEC.30106@sgi.com> <20121115220117.GJ14281@dastard> In-Reply-To: <20121115220117.GJ14281@dastard> 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: Dave Chinner Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 11/15/12 16:01, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 03:34:36PM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: >> On 11/15/12 15:16, Dave Chinner wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 03:01:49PM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: >>>> On 11/15/12 14:48, Dave Chinner wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 11:55:47AM -0600, Mark Tinguely wrote: >>>>>> The xfs_quota program does not generate output with V2 which causes >>>>>> xfstest 050 to fails. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think that has anything to do with this patch orthechange >>>>> for V2 - V2 only changes quotacheck behaviour, and that doesn't >>>>> impact xfs_quota behaviour. The test passes just fine here: >>>>> >>>>> $ sudo ./check 050 >>>>> FSTYP -- xfs (debug) >>>>> PLATFORM -- Linux/x86_64 test-2 3.7.0-rc5-dgc+ >>>>> MKFS_OPTIONS -- -f -bsize=4096 /dev/vdb >>>>> MOUNT_OPTIONS -- /dev/vdb /mnt/scratch >>>>> >>>>> 050 14s ... 15s >>>>> Ran: 050 >>>>> Passed all 1 tests >>>>> >>>>> So perhaps there's something else going wrong on your machine? >>> >>> Curious. There aren't any errors in the syslog/dmesg saying that >>> buffers failed verification during the quota check runs, are there? >>> Also, what platform are you testing on? >> >> No error message in dmesg nor /var/log/messages >> >> This is a x86_64. >> >> It is running OSS with most recent commit: >> >> commit 579b62faa5fb16ffeeb88cda5e2c4e95730881af >> >> Your two series: >> xfs: fixes for 3.7-rc6 >> xfs: current queue for 3.8 >> >> I added the XFS_SB_VERSION2_CRCBIT attribute to xfsprogs and enabled >> it in mkfs.xfs and remade the test/scratch filesystems. > > That's likely your problem. Why are you testing with this bit set - > that's to indicate that there are on disk format changes, and none > of them occur in this patch set. Hence the kernel should be refusing > to mount any filesystem with that bit set. As such, I'm using a > standard userspace for all this regression testing, because > filesystems with the CRC bit should be failed during mount on 3.8. > > /me goes looking.... > > Ok, the kernel isn't refusing to mount when that bit is set. That's > a bug in the patch that introduces the CRC bit that I borked when > splitting it out of a larger patch. I'll send an updated patch (it's > the xfs: add CRC infrastructure patch). > removing the attribute bit from the filesystem/tools does not change the failure on 050 with V2 patches. --Mark. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs