[PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Mark Tinguely]

[-- Attachment #1: xfstests-fill-directory.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2907 bytes --]

This tests triggers an assert in the XFS directory unbalance code.
This test originally written by Brian Foster and suggestions
from Micheal Semon.

Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com> 
---
 tests/generic/319     |   62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 tests/generic/319.out |    2 +
 tests/generic/group   |    1 
 3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)

Index: b/tests/generic/319
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/generic/319
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+#! /bin/bash
+# FS QA Test No. 319
+#
+# Test directory code correctly handles fsstress filling the filesystem
+#
+#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
+# Copyright (c) 2013 SGI.  All Rights Reserved.
+#
+# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
+# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
+# published by the Free Software Foundation.
+#
+# This program is distributed in the hope that it would be useful,
+# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+# GNU General Public License for more details.
+#
+# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
+# along with this program; if not, write the Free Software Foundation,
+# Inc.,  51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA
+#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
+#
+
+seq=`basename $0`
+seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
+echo "QA output created by $seq"
+
+here=`pwd`
+tmp=/tmp/$$
+status=1	# failure is the default!
+trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
+
+_cleanup()
+{
+    cd /
+}
+
+# get standard environment, filters and checks
+. ./common/rc
+. ./common/filter
+_require_scratch
+
+# real QA test starts here
+
+_supported_fs generic
+_supported_os IRIX Linux
+
+_scratch_unmount > /dev/null 2>&1
+_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+_scratch_mount > /dev/null 2>&1
+
+# Fill the filesystem.
+FSSTRESS_ARGS="-z -s 1378390208 -fsymlink=1 -n7500000 -p4 -d $SCRATCH_MNT"
+$FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+
+cd $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seqres.full 2>&1
+sync
+# A debug XFS may assert in the remove due to a directory bug.
+rm -rf *
+echo "--- silence is golden ---"
+status=0
+exit
Index: b/tests/generic/319.out
===================================================================
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/generic/319.out
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+QA output created by 319
+--- silence is golden ---
Index: b/tests/generic/group
===================================================================
--- a/tests/generic/group
+++ b/tests/generic/group
@@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
 316 auto quick
 317 auto metadata quick
 318 acl attr auto quick
+319 stress


_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Eryu Guan]

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:59:47AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> This tests triggers an assert in the XFS directory unbalance code.
> This test originally written by Brian Foster and suggestions
> from Micheal Semon.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com> 
> ---
>  tests/generic/319     |   62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  tests/generic/319.out |    2 +
>  tests/generic/group   |    1 
>  3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: b/tests/generic/319
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/generic/319
> @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# FS QA Test No. 319
> +#
> +# Test directory code correctly handles fsstress filling the filesystem
> +#
> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> +# Copyright (c) 2013 SGI.  All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> +# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
> +# published by the Free Software Foundation.
> +#
> +# This program is distributed in the hope that it would be useful,
> +# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> +# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> +# GNU General Public License for more details.
> +#
> +# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> +# along with this program; if not, write the Free Software Foundation,
> +# Inc.,  51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA
> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> +#
> +
> +seq=`basename $0`
> +seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
> +echo "QA output created by $seq"
> +
> +here=`pwd`
> +tmp=/tmp/$$
> +status=1	# failure is the default!
> +trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
> +
> +_cleanup()
> +{
> +    cd /
> +}
> +
> +# get standard environment, filters and checks
> +. ./common/rc
> +. ./common/filter
> +_require_scratch
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +
> +_supported_fs generic
> +_supported_os IRIX Linux
> +
> +_scratch_unmount > /dev/null 2>&1

This is not necessary, _require_scratch has done the unmount work.

> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g >> $seqres.full 2>&1

_scratch_mkfs_sized expects fssize in bytes, 11g is not a valid value
The comments in common/rc about _scratch_mkfs_sized say

# _scratch_mkfs_sized <size in bytes> [optional blocksize]

> +_scratch_mount > /dev/null 2>&1
> +
> +# Fill the filesystem.
> +FSSTRESS_ARGS="-z -s 1378390208 -fsymlink=1 -n7500000 -p4 -d $SCRATCH_MNT"
> +$FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +cd $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +sync
> +# A debug XFS may assert in the remove due to a directory bug.
> +rm -rf *
> +echo "--- silence is golden ---"
> +status=0
> +exit
> Index: b/tests/generic/319.out
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/generic/319.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +QA output created by 319
> +--- silence is golden ---
> Index: b/tests/generic/group
> ===================================================================
> --- a/tests/generic/group
> +++ b/tests/generic/group
> @@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
>  316 auto quick
>  317 auto metadata quick
>  318 acl attr auto quick
> +319 stress

Should be in auto group too I guess.

Thanks,
Eryu Guan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Eric Sandeen]

On 9/17/13 9:59 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> This tests triggers an assert in the XFS directory unbalance code.
> This test originally written by Brian Foster and suggestions
> from Micheal Semon.

cool, thanks.  Comments below.

> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com> 
> ---
>  tests/generic/319     |   62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  tests/generic/319.out |    2 +
>  tests/generic/group   |    1 
>  3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: b/tests/generic/319
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/generic/319
> @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# FS QA Test No. 319
> +#
> +# Test directory code correctly handles fsstress filling the filesystem
> +#
> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> +# Copyright (c) 2013 SGI.  All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> +# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
> +# published by the Free Software Foundation.
> +#
> +# This program is distributed in the hope that it would be useful,
> +# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> +# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> +# GNU General Public License for more details.
> +#
> +# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
> +# along with this program; if not, write the Free Software Foundation,
> +# Inc.,  51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA
> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> +#
> +
> +seq=`basename $0`
> +seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
> +echo "QA output created by $seq"
> +
> +here=`pwd`
> +tmp=/tmp/$$
> +status=1	# failure is the default!
> +trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
> +
> +_cleanup()
> +{
> +    cd /
> +}

That seems pointless; usually it's done w/ rm -f $tmp.*
right after, but we have no tmpfile, so...

> +
> +# get standard environment, filters and checks
> +. ./common/rc
> +. ./common/filter
> +_require_scratch
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +
> +_supported_fs generic
> +_supported_os IRIX Linux
> +
> +_scratch_unmount > /dev/null 2>&1

Aside:

I see this done both ways - is it required to unmount scratch at the beginning
of a test?  I don't think so (I know it's done in many tests, though, but
again, C&P & cargo cult?  Or not?  I'm not sure :( )

I guess it doesn't hurt, but at some point I'd like to get it straight
about who's required to umount scratch, and when (if at all).

> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g >> $seqres.full 2>&1

_scratch_mkfs_sized doesn't take units like this ('g'), so the above fails to
actually make an 11g fs:

# Create fs of certain size on scratch device
# _scratch_mkfs_sized <size in bytes> [optional blocksize]
_scratch_mkfs_sized()

so we get this in 319.full:

expr: non-numeric argument
./common/rc: line 576: [: 11g: integer expression expected

but then it seems like mkfs carries on anyway w/ defaults.  :(

Apparently the mkfs 11g part isn't actually critical? ;)

maybe _scratch_mkfs_sized needs something like this at the top:

re='^[0-9]+$'
if ! [[ $fssize =~ $re ]] ; then
   _notrun "error: _scratch_mkfs_sized: $fssize not a number of bytes"
fi

> +_scratch_mount > /dev/null 2>&1

is ignore-all-output really the right thing to do?  When does _scratch_mount
emit anything?  (more cargo cult)? :)

> +# Fill the filesystem.
> +FSSTRESS_ARGS="-z -s 1378390208 -fsymlink=1 -n7500000 -p4 -d $SCRATCH_MNT"
> +$FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +cd $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seqres.full 2>&1

cd doesn't emit anything except on error, right, and if there's an error we'd better
stop the test right here!

> +sync
> +# A debug XFS may assert in the remove due to a directory bug.
> +rm -rf *

I'd feel a whole lot better if you did rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/* just in case
we somehow ended up in the wrong place here.

Or even better if you pointed fsstress at $SCRATCH_MNT/$seq.dir, and
then did rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/$seq.dir - just to avoid that nasty
should-never-happen-still-scary "rm -rf /*"

-Eric

> +echo "--- silence is golden ---"
> +status=0
> +exit
> Index: b/tests/generic/319.out
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/generic/319.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> +QA output created by 319
> +--- silence is golden ---
> Index: b/tests/generic/group
> ===================================================================
> --- a/tests/generic/group
> +++ b/tests/generic/group
> @@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
>  316 auto quick
>  317 auto metadata quick
>  318 acl attr auto quick
> +319 stress
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Mark Tinguely]

On 09/17/13 10:28, Eryu Guan wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:59:47AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
...

>> +_scratch_unmount>  /dev/null 2>&1
>
> This is not necessary, _require_scratch has done the unmount work.

okay, stole that from other tests.

>
>> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g>>  $seqres.full 2>&1
>
> _scratch_mkfs_sized expects fssize in bytes, 11g is not a valid value
> The comments in common/rc about _scratch_mkfs_sized say
>
> # _scratch_mkfs_sized<size in bytes>  [optional blocksize]

That was a shortcut for xfs. Looking in common/rc. I see that it breaks 
the other filesystems that need the size in blocks.

...

>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
>> +QA output created by 319
>> +--- silence is golden ---
>> Index: b/tests/generic/group
>> ===================================================================
>> --- a/tests/generic/group
>> +++ b/tests/generic/group
>> @@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
>>   316 auto quick
>>   317 auto metadata quick
>>   318 acl attr auto quick
>> +319 stress
>
> Should be in auto group too I guess.

It takes a very long time to run to completion, don't know if people 
want this in the auto run.

> Thanks,
> Eryu Guan

Thanks for the feedback

--Mark.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Eric Sandeen]

On 9/17/13 10:48 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 09/17/13 10:28, Eryu Guan wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:59:47AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> ...
> 
>>> +_scratch_unmount>  /dev/null 2>&1
>>
>> This is not necessary, _require_scratch has done the unmount work.
> 
> okay, stole that from other tests.
> 
>>
>>> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g>>  $seqres.full 2>&1
>>
>> _scratch_mkfs_sized expects fssize in bytes, 11g is not a valid value
>> The comments in common/rc about _scratch_mkfs_sized say
>>
>> # _scratch_mkfs_sized<size in bytes>  [optional blocksize]
> 
> That was a shortcut for xfs. Looking in common/rc. I see that it breaks the other filesystems that need the size in blocks.

at least mkfs.extN also understands "11g" but the helper does not, because
it causes a failure in the device size check, (for any fs):

        [ "$fssize" -gt "$devsize" ] && _notrun "Scratch device too small"
> ...
> 
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
>>> +QA output created by 319
>>> +--- silence is golden ---
>>> Index: b/tests/generic/group
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- a/tests/generic/group
>>> +++ b/tests/generic/group
>>> @@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
>>>   316 auto quick
>>>   317 auto metadata quick
>>>   318 acl attr auto quick
>>> +319 stress
>>
>> Should be in auto group too I guess.
> 
> It takes a very long time to run to completion, don't know if people want this in the auto run.

how long is long?  We do have "quick" for people who want quick.  I think auto is probably
ok.  Maybe we should add a "slow" group, and you can "-x slow" :)

-Eric

>> Thanks,
>> Eryu Guan
> 
> Thanks for the feedback
> 
> --Mark.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Mark Tinguely]

On 09/17/13 10:41, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 9/17/13 9:59 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>> This tests triggers an assert in the XFS directory unbalance code.
>> This test originally written by Brian Foster and suggestions
>> from Micheal Semon.
>
> cool, thanks.  Comments below.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely<tinguely@sgi.com>
>> ---
>>   tests/generic/319     |   62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   tests/generic/319.out |    2 +
>>   tests/generic/group   |    1
>>   3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
>>
>> Index: b/tests/generic/319
>> ===================================================================
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tests/generic/319
>> @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
>> +#! /bin/bash
>> +# FS QA Test No. 319
>> +#
>> +# Test directory code correctly handles fsstress filling the filesystem
>> +#
>> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> +# Copyright (c) 2013 SGI.  All Rights Reserved.
>> +#
>> +# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>> +# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
>> +# published by the Free Software Foundation.
>> +#
>> +# This program is distributed in the hope that it would be useful,
>> +# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> +# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>> +# GNU General Public License for more details.
>> +#
>> +# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>> +# along with this program; if not, write the Free Software Foundation,
>> +# Inc.,  51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA
>> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> +#
>> +
>> +seq=`basename $0`
>> +seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
>> +echo "QA output created by $seq"
>> +
>> +here=`pwd`
>> +tmp=/tmp/$$
>> +status=1	# failure is the default!
>> +trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
>> +
>> +_cleanup()
>> +{
>> +    cd /
>> +}
>
> That seems pointless; usually it's done w/ rm -f $tmp.*
> right after, but we have no tmpfile, so...

Yeah, no cleanup is needed.

>> +
>> +# get standard environment, filters and checks
>> +. ./common/rc
>> +. ./common/filter
>> +_require_scratch
>> +
>> +# real QA test starts here
>> +
>> +_supported_fs generic
>> +_supported_os IRIX Linux
>> +
>> +_scratch_unmount>  /dev/null 2>&1
>
> Aside:
>
> I see this done both ways - is it required to unmount scratch at the beginning
> of a test?  I don't think so (I know it's done in many tests, though, but
> again, C&P&  cargo cult?  Or not?  I'm not sure :( )
>
> I guess it doesn't hurt, but at some point I'd like to get it straight
> about who's required to umount scratch, and when (if at all).

Have to unmount for the mkfs, as noted by Eryu, it is already done. I 
would rather manually unmount it than be surprised when someone changes 
the common files.
>
>> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g>>  $seqres.full 2>&1
>
> _scratch_mkfs_sized doesn't take units like this ('g'), so the above fails to
> actually make an 11g fs:
>
> # Create fs of certain size on scratch device
> # _scratch_mkfs_sized<size in bytes>  [optional blocksize]
> _scratch_mkfs_sized()
>
> so we get this in 319.full:
>
> expr: non-numeric argument
> ./common/rc: line 576: [: 11g: integer expression expected
>
> but then it seems like mkfs carries on anyway w/ defaults.  :(
>
> Apparently the mkfs 11g part isn't actually critical? ;)

it works on xfs because mkfs.xfs size can take those values, but yes it 
breaks on other filesystem. my bad.

>
> maybe _scratch_mkfs_sized needs something like this at the top:
>
> re='^[0-9]+$'
> if ! [[ $fssize =~ $re ]] ; then
>     _notrun "error: _scratch_mkfs_sized: $fssize not a number of bytes"
> fi
>
>> +_scratch_mount>  /dev/null 2>&1
>
> is ignore-all-output really the right thing to do?  When does _scratch_mount
> emit anything?  (more cargo cult)? :)
>
>> +# Fill the filesystem.
>> +FSSTRESS_ARGS="-z -s 1378390208 -fsymlink=1 -n7500000 -p4 -d $SCRATCH_MNT"
>> +$FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS>>  $seqres.full 2>&1
>> +
>> +cd $SCRATCH_MNT>>  $seqres.full 2>&1
>
> cd doesn't emit anything except on error, right, and if there's an error we'd better
> stop the test right here!
>
>> +sync
>> +# A debug XFS may assert in the remove due to a directory bug.
>> +rm -rf *
>
> I'd feel a whole lot better if you did rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/* just in case
> we somehow ended up in the wrong place here.
>
> Or even better if you pointed fsstress at $SCRATCH_MNT/$seq.dir, and
> then did rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/$seq.dir - just to avoid that nasty
> should-never-happen-still-scary "rm -rf /*"
>
Makes a lot of sense.
> -Eric

Thanks Eric.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Mark Tinguely]

On 09/17/13 10:51, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 9/17/13 10:48 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>> On 09/17/13 10:28, Eryu Guan wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:59:47AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>>> +_scratch_unmount>   /dev/null 2>&1
>>>
>>> This is not necessary, _require_scratch has done the unmount work.
>>
>> okay, stole that from other tests.
>>
>>>
>>>> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g>>   $seqres.full 2>&1
>>>
>>> _scratch_mkfs_sized expects fssize in bytes, 11g is not a valid value
>>> The comments in common/rc about _scratch_mkfs_sized say
>>>
>>> # _scratch_mkfs_sized<size in bytes>   [optional blocksize]
>>
>> That was a shortcut for xfs. Looking in common/rc. I see that it breaks the other filesystems that need the size in blocks.
>
> at least mkfs.extN also understands "11g" but the helper does not, because
> it causes a failure in the device size check, (for any fs):
>
>          [ "$fssize" -gt "$devsize" ]&&  _notrun "Scratch device too small"
>> ...
>>
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
>>>> +QA output created by 319
>>>> +--- silence is golden ---
>>>> Index: b/tests/generic/group
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> --- a/tests/generic/group
>>>> +++ b/tests/generic/group
>>>> @@ -121,3 +121,4 @@
>>>>    316 auto quick
>>>>    317 auto metadata quick
>>>>    318 acl attr auto quick
>>>> +319 stress
>>>
>>> Should be in auto group too I guess.
>>
>> It takes a very long time to run to completion, don't know if people want this in the auto run.
>
> how long is long?  We do have "quick" for people who want quick.  I think auto is probably
> ok.  Maybe we should add a "slow" group, and you can "-x slow" :)
>
> -Eric
>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Eryu Guan
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback
>>
>> --Mark.

About 45 minutes.

--Mark.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Eric Sandeen]

On 9/17/13 10:58 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> On 09/17/13 10:41, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 9/17/13 9:59 AM, Mark Tinguely wrote:
>>> This tests triggers an assert in the XFS directory unbalance code.
>>> This test originally written by Brian Foster and suggestions
>>> from Micheal Semon.
>>
>> cool, thanks.  Comments below.
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Tinguely<tinguely@sgi.com>
>>> ---
>>>   tests/generic/319     |   62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   tests/generic/319.out |    2 +
>>>   tests/generic/group   |    1
>>>   3 files changed, 65 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> Index: b/tests/generic/319
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/tests/generic/319
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
>>> +#! /bin/bash
>>> +# FS QA Test No. 319
>>> +#
>>> +# Test directory code correctly handles fsstress filling the filesystem
>>> +#
>>> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> +# Copyright (c) 2013 SGI.  All Rights Reserved.
>>> +#
>>> +# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>>> +# modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
>>> +# published by the Free Software Foundation.
>>> +#
>>> +# This program is distributed in the hope that it would be useful,
>>> +# but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>>> +# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>>> +# GNU General Public License for more details.
>>> +#
>>> +# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>>> +# along with this program; if not, write the Free Software Foundation,
>>> +# Inc.,  51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA  02110-1301  USA
>>> +#-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> +#
>>> +
>>> +seq=`basename $0`
>>> +seqres=$RESULT_DIR/$seq
>>> +echo "QA output created by $seq"
>>> +
>>> +here=`pwd`
>>> +tmp=/tmp/$$
>>> +status=1    # failure is the default!
>>> +trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15
>>> +
>>> +_cleanup()
>>> +{
>>> +    cd /
>>> +}
>>
>> That seems pointless; usually it's done w/ rm -f $tmp.*
>> right after, but we have no tmpfile, so...
> 
> Yeah, no cleanup is needed.
> 
>>> +
>>> +# get standard environment, filters and checks
>>> +. ./common/rc
>>> +. ./common/filter
>>> +_require_scratch
>>> +
>>> +# real QA test starts here
>>> +
>>> +_supported_fs generic
>>> +_supported_os IRIX Linux
>>> +
>>> +_scratch_unmount>  /dev/null 2>&1
>>
>> Aside:
>>
>> I see this done both ways - is it required to unmount scratch at the beginning
>> of a test?  I don't think so (I know it's done in many tests, though, but
>> again, C&P&  cargo cult?  Or not?  I'm not sure :( )
>>
>> I guess it doesn't hurt, but at some point I'd like to get it straight
>> about who's required to umount scratch, and when (if at all).
> 
> Have to unmount for the mkfs, as noted by Eryu, it is already done. I
> would rather manually unmount it than be surprised when someone
> changes the common files.

If that happens, tons of tests will break.  I'd really just remove it
for clarity, but *shrug*

>>
>>> +_scratch_mkfs_sized 11g>>  $seqres.full 2>&1
>>
>> _scratch_mkfs_sized doesn't take units like this ('g'), so the above fails to
>> actually make an 11g fs:
>>
>> # Create fs of certain size on scratch device
>> # _scratch_mkfs_sized<size in bytes>  [optional blocksize]
>> _scratch_mkfs_sized()
>>
>> so we get this in 319.full:
>>
>> expr: non-numeric argument
>> ./common/rc: line 576: [: 11g: integer expression expected
>>
>> but then it seems like mkfs carries on anyway w/ defaults.  :(
>>
>> Apparently the mkfs 11g part isn't actually critical? ;)
> 
> it works on xfs because mkfs.xfs size can take those values, but yes it breaks on other filesystem. my bad.

One other nitpick in this area, please remove $seqres.full before you start so it doesn't grow each time the test is run.

(hm maybe we should add that to ./check or something; so many tests miss this)



But - no, it doesn't work for xfs either, at least not in all cases, because
it doesn't do the device size check.  Here's xfs output on a < 11G device:

expr: non-numeric argument
./common/rc: line 582: [: 11g: integer expression expected
** mkfs failed with extra mkfs options added to "-bsize=4096" by test 319 **
** attempting to mkfs using only test 319 options: -d size=11g -b size=4096 **
size 11g specified for data subvolume is too large, maximum is 1048241 blocks
Usage: mkfs.xfs
/* blocksize */         [-b log=n|size=num]
...

and w/o error checking (2>&1 and no || _fail) the test just carries on w/o a
fresh mkfs, on whatever size it happens to be.

-Eric

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs directory unbalance assert test

[Dave Chinner]

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:59:47AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> +# Fill the filesystem.
> +FSSTRESS_ARGS="-z -s 1378390208 -fsymlink=1 -n7500000 -p4 -d $SCRATCH_MNT"
> +$FSSTRESS_PROG $FSSTRESS_ARGS >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +cd $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +sync
> +# A debug XFS may assert in the remove due to a directory bug.
> +rm -rf *

Wouldn't this be better:

sync
rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/*

Remember, xfstests runs as root and so having a "rm -rf *" anywhere
in a test is a disaster just waiting to happen....

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs