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 (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B6A7F37 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:24:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 327A2AC004 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 07:24:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [63.231.237.45]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id fBoDYoGauHLVrrFh for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2013 07:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5149C697.6060308@sandeen.net> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:24:23 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: Count journal size in test 289 References: <1363710082-11371-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> <51489ACE.1010205@sandeen.net> <20130320104744.GA13294@quack.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20130320104744.GA13294@quack.suse.cz> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jan Kara Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com 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 >>> --- >>> 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