Skip to contentSkip to conversation

xfstests: fix test 050

PATCH Applied Ben Myers 3 participants 5 messages Feb 22, 2012 – Mar 31, 2012

lore
Share & tools
lore
author
#1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 xfstests: update inode softlimit output in 050

With Mitsuo Hayasaka's kernel patch "xfs: change available ranges of softlimit and hardlimit in quota check", xfs quota behavior is slightly different.

This needs to be reflected in test 050. The new behavior is that we only start the timer when we're above soft inode quota, and we don't start the timer when we're at or below.

Signed-off-by Ben Myers <[email protected]>
050.out +3 -3
Index: xfstests/050.out
===================================================================
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ realtime =RDEV extsz=XXX blocks=XXX, rte
 
 *** push past the soft block limit
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
-[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [7 days] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
+[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
 
 *** push past the hard inode limit (expect EDQUOT)
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ realtime =RDEV extsz=XXX blocks=XXX, rte
 
 *** push past the soft block limit
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
-[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [7 days] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
+[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
 
 *** push past the hard inode limit (expect EDQUOT)
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]

@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ realtime =RDEV extsz=XXX blocks=XXX, rte
 
 *** push past the soft block limit
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
-[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [7 days] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
+[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
 
 *** push past the hard inode limit (expect EDQUOT)
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

#2 lore raw

Re: [patch 1/1] xfstests: update inode softlimit output in 050

Quoted 13 lines · Ben Myers

With Mitsuo Hayasaka's kernel patch "xfs: change available ranges of softlimit and hardlimit in quota check", xfs quota behavior is slightly different.

This needs to be reflected in test 050. The new behavior is that we only start the timer when we're above soft inode quota, and we don't start the timer when we're at or below.

Signed-off-by Ben Myers <[email protected]>

Index: xfstests/050.out
===================================================================

050.out realtime =RDEV extsz=XXX blocks=XXX, rte · line 23

Quoted 5 lines
050.out +1 -1
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ realtime =RDEV extsz=XXX blocks=XXX, rte
 
 *** push past the soft block limit
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
-[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [7 days] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
+[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]

...

Hm, but now old kernels would fail.

Maybe it's better to go 1 past the limit in the test, rather than meet it, and then it'd fail on both old & new kernels?

-Eric

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

author
#3 lore raw

Re: [patch 1/1] xfstests: update inode softlimit output in 050

Hey Eric,

Quoted 24 lines · Eric Sandeen
Quoted 18 lines · Ben Myers

With Mitsuo Hayasaka's kernel patch "xfs: change available ranges of softlimit and hardlimit in quota check", xfs quota behavior is slightly different.

This needs to be reflected in test 050. The new behavior is that we only start the timer when we're above soft inode quota, and we don't start the timer when we're at or below.

Signed-off-by Ben Myers <[email protected]>

Index: xfstests/050.out
===================================================================

050.out +1 -1
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ realtime =RDEV extsz=XXX blocks=XXX, rte
 
 *** push past the soft block limit
 [ROOT] 0 0 0 00 [--------] 3 0 0 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
-[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [7 days] 0 0 0 00 [--------]
+[NAME] 140 100 500 00 [7 days] 4 4 10 00 [--------] 0 0 0 00 [--------]

...

Quoted 1 line

Hm, but now old kernels would fail.

Sure, but Mitsuo did fix a genuine off-by-one bug... ;)

Quoted 1 line

Maybe it's better to go 1 past the limit in the test, rather than meet it, and then it'd fail on both old & new kernels?

It is of low severity, so this seems like a reasonable middle ground. I'll be happy to respin this patch, unless you'd prefer to.

Thanks,
Ben

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs