public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
To: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>
Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, zlang@kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfs/548: Verify correctness of upgrading an fs to support large extent counters
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2022 08:35:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yp4etwsUF/B6aSbe@magnolia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220606124101.263872-5-chandan.babu@oracle.com>

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 06:11:01PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote:
> This commit adds a test to verify upgrade of an existing V5 filesystem to
> support large extent counters.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chandan Babu R <chandan.babu@oracle.com>
> ---
>  tests/xfs/548     | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  tests/xfs/548.out |  12 +++++
>  2 files changed, 121 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100755 tests/xfs/548
>  create mode 100644 tests/xfs/548.out
> 
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/548 b/tests/xfs/548
> new file mode 100755
> index 00000000..6c577584
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/xfs/548
> @@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
> +#! /bin/bash
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +# Copyright (c) 2022 Oracle.  All Rights Reserved.
> +#
> +# FS QA Test 548
> +#
> +# Test to verify upgrade of an existing V5 filesystem to support large extent
> +# counters.
> +#
> +. ./common/preamble
> +_begin_fstest auto quick metadata
> +
> +# Import common functions.
> +. ./common/filter
> +. ./common/attr
> +. ./common/inject
> +. ./common/populate
> +
> +# real QA test starts here
> +_supported_fs xfs
> +_require_scratch
> +_require_scratch_xfs_nrext64
> +_require_attrs
> +_require_xfs_debug
> +_require_test_program "punch-alternating"
> +_require_xfs_io_error_injection "bmap_alloc_minlen_extent"
> +
> +_scratch_mkfs -d size=$((512 * 1024 * 1024)) >> $seqres.full
> +_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full
> +
> +bsize=$(_get_file_block_size $SCRATCH_MNT)
> +
> +testfile=$SCRATCH_MNT/testfile
> +
> +nr_blks=20
> +
> +echo "Add blocks to file's data fork"
> +$XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite 0 $((nr_blks * bsize))" $testfile \
> +	     >> $seqres.full
> +$here/src/punch-alternating $testfile
> +
> +echo "Consume free space"
> +fillerdir=$SCRATCH_MNT/fillerdir
> +nr_free_blks=$(stat -f -c '%f' $SCRATCH_MNT)
> +nr_free_blks=$((nr_free_blks * 90 / 100))
> +
> +_fill_fs $((bsize * nr_free_blks)) $fillerdir $bsize 0 \
> +	 >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +
> +echo "Create fragmented filesystem"
> +for dentry in $(ls -1 $fillerdir/); do
> +	$here/src/punch-alternating $fillerdir/$dentry >> $seqres.full
> +done
> +
> +echo "Inject bmap_alloc_minlen_extent error tag"
> +_scratch_inject_error bmap_alloc_minlen_extent 1
> +
> +echo "Add blocks to file's attr fork"
> +nr_blks=10
> +attr_len=255
> +nr_attrs=$((nr_blks * bsize / attr_len))
> +for i in $(seq 1 $nr_attrs); do
> +	attr="$(printf "trusted.%0247d" $i)"
> +	$SETFATTR_PROG -n "$attr" $testfile >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +	[[ $? != 0 ]] && break
> +done
> +
> +testino=$(stat -c '%i' $testfile)
> +
> +echo "Unmount filesystem"
> +_scratch_unmount >> $seqres.full
> +
> +orig_dcnt=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field core.nextents "inode $testino")
> +orig_acnt=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field core.naextents "inode $testino")
> +
> +echo "Upgrade filesystem to support large extent counters"
> +_scratch_xfs_admin -O nrext64=1 >> $seqres.full 2>&1
> +if [[ $? != 0 ]]; then
> +	_notrun "Filesystem geometry is not suitable for upgrading"
> +fi
> +
> +
> +echo "Mount filesystem"
> +_scratch_mount >> $seqres.full
> +
> +echo "Modify inode core"
> +touch $testfile
> +
> +echo "Unmount filesystem"
> +_scratch_unmount >> $seqres.full
> +
> +dcnt=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field core.nextents "inode $testino")
> +acnt=$(_scratch_xfs_get_metadata_field core.naextents "inode $testino")
> +
> +echo "Verify inode extent counter values after fs upgrade"

Is there a scenario where the inode counters would become corrupt after
enabling the superblock feature bit?  IIRC repair doesn't rewrite the
inodes during the upgrade... so is this test merely being cautious?  Or
is this covering a failure you found somewhere while writing the feature?

--D

> +
> +if [[ $orig_dcnt != $dcnt ]]; then
> +	echo "Corrupt data extent counter"
> +	exit 1
> +fi
> +
> +if [[ $orig_acnt != $acnt ]]; then
> +	echo "Corrupt attr extent counter"
> +	exit 1
> +fi
> +
> +# success, all done
> +status=0
> +exit
> diff --git a/tests/xfs/548.out b/tests/xfs/548.out
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..19a7f907
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/xfs/548.out
> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
> +QA output created by 548
> +Add blocks to file's data fork
> +Consume free space
> +Create fragmented filesystem
> +Inject bmap_alloc_minlen_extent error tag
> +Add blocks to file's attr fork
> +Unmount filesystem
> +Upgrade filesystem to support large extent counters
> +Mount filesystem
> +Modify inode core
> +Unmount filesystem
> +Verify inode extent counter values after fs upgrade
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-06 15:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-06 12:40 [PATCH 0/4] Large extent counters tests Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:40 ` [PATCH 1/4] xfs/270: Fix ro mount failure when nrext64 option is enabled Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:31   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07 23:51   ` Dave Chinner
2022-06-08  8:22     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:40 ` [PATCH 2/4] common/xfs: Add helper to check if nrext64 option is supported Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:30   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07 23:01   ` Dave Chinner
2022-06-08  8:15     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:41 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs/547: Verify that the correct inode extent counters are updated with/without nrext64 Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:40   ` Darrick J. Wong
2022-06-07  9:36     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-08  3:59       ` Zorro Lang
2022-06-08  9:11         ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 12:41 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs/548: Verify correctness of upgrading an fs to support large extent counters Chandan Babu R
2022-06-06 15:35   ` Darrick J. Wong [this message]
2022-06-07  9:47     ` Chandan Babu R
2022-06-07 15:20       ` Darrick J. Wong

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=Yp4etwsUF/B6aSbe@magnolia \
    --to=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=chandan.babu@oracle.com \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zlang@kernel.org \
    /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