From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: Count journal size in test 289
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:24:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5149C697.6060308@sandeen.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130320104744.GA13294@quack.suse.cz>
On 3/20/13 5:47 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 19-03-13 12:05:18, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 3/19/13 11:21 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
>>> Test 289 ignored the fact that historically journal is not accounted as
>>> fs overhead. For larger filesystems it is hidden in 1% tolerance but for
>>> filesystems smaller than 12G the test fails. So make the counting
>>> precise to work everywhere.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> 0875a2b448fcaba67010850cf9649293a5ef653d ext4: include journal blocks in df overhead calcs
> Bah, I missed that. But ext3 definitely needs this (and I'm not sure we
> want to change that behavior after so many years - it's mostly cosmetic
> anyway so the possibility of breaking some userspace seems a bad tradeoff).
Sure, that's fine. Ext4 has munged df reporting a few times recently
anyway, so figured it was worth sneaking in something to make it more
accurate.
>> changed this again, right - so will this change work in both cases?
> No, it will now fail for small ext4 filesystems instead of small ext3
> filesystems :). So we will count journal blocks only for ext3, ok?
Sounds like a plan.
>> Also: is using "Journal length: " any simpler?
> It would be, but older versions of dumpe2fs don't have that (it happened
> somewhere between 1.41.9 and 1.41.11) so I figured I will use a more
> generic approach (too lazy to fix my test machine ;).
Makes sense :)
Thanks,
-Eric
> Honza
>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
>>> ---
>>> 289 | 12 ++++++++----
>>> common.filter | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/289 b/289
>>> index b057c20..9bba144 100755
>>> --- a/289
>>> +++ b/289
>>> @@ -59,10 +59,14 @@ TOTAL_BLOCKS=`dumpe2fs -h $SCRATCH_DEV 2>/dev/null \
>>> FREE_BLOCKS=`dumpe2fs -h $SCRATCH_DEV 2>/dev/null \
>>> | awk '/Free blocks:/{print $3}'`
>>>
>>> -# nb: kernels today don't count journal blocks as overhead, but should.
>>> -# For most filesystems this will still be within tolerance.
>>> -# Overhead is all the blocks (already) used by the fs itself:
>>> -OVERHEAD=$(($TOTAL_BLOCKS-$FREE_BLOCKS))
>>> +JOURNAL_SIZE=`dumpe2fs -h $SCRATCH_DEV 2>/dev/null \
>>> + | awk '/Journal size:/{print $3}' | _filter_size_to_bytes`
>>> +BLOCK_SIZE=`dumpe2fs -h $SCRATCH_DEV 2>/dev/null \
>>> + | awk '/Block size:/{print $3}'`
>>> +JOURNAL_BLOCKS=$(($JOURNAL_SIZE/$BLOCK_SIZE))
>>> +
>>> +# kernels today don't count journal blocks as overhead, but should.
>>> +OVERHEAD=$(($TOTAL_BLOCKS-$FREE_BLOCKS-$JOURNAL_BLOCKS))
>>>
>>> # bsddf|minixdf
>>> # Set the behaviour for the statfs system call. The minixdf
>>> diff --git a/common.filter b/common.filter
>>> index f0f6076..fcd7589 100644
>>> --- a/common.filter
>>> +++ b/common.filter
>>> @@ -229,5 +229,20 @@ _filter_spaces()
>>> sed -e 's/ [ ]*/ /g'
>>> }
>>>
>>> +# Convert string read from stdin like 128K to bytes and print it to stdout
>>> +_filter_size_to_bytes()
>>> +{
>>> + read size
>>> + suffix=${size:${#size}-1}
>>> + mul=1
>>> + case $suffix in
>>> + K) mul=1024 ;;
>>> + M) mul=$((1024*1024)) ;;
>>> + G) mul=$((1024*1024*1024)) ;;
>>> + T) mul=$((1024*1024*1024*1024)) ;;
>>> + esac
>>> + echo $((${size:0:${#size}-1}*$mul))
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> # make sure this script returns success
>>> /bin/true
>>>
>>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-20 14:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-19 16:21 [PATCH] xfstests: Count journal size in test 289 Jan Kara
2013-03-19 17:05 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-20 10:47 ` Jan Kara
2013-03-20 14:24 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5149C697.6060308@sandeen.net \
--to=sandeen@sandeen.net \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox