From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3750C433FE for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA54C60EDF for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234717AbhJKH6M (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Oct 2021 03:58:12 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:21844 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234720AbhJKH6M (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Oct 2021 03:58:12 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19B6Clmw029169 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 03:56:12 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : in-reply-to : references : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=C/Z6RHICHT6pPiKNSaaRbrHVBpjNw2K54vUpjA9O7sw=; b=Uu+XtFphXWyDYh5UO1wbqtw0c6a86d8kT8Kh9UlNnvSiPBl2cNIot/iMFB5wu9YAcoXX /sgUg0Vme1wkGetxzD0a/6fjKHrbCo1Jc9nuJP2AD848o85jDu7K0rAsSS2t6IugU0QV YbXzeEMTilH7UR0NaL2pn4yKsx3EkDMMHyIPvNHXYroT80xqhV8bEznUK9JTtX/+al4o SPFu8RqhzFulymPFfTjyWQKb9otZlQYuGMHWwI07DIDCmo8awrt+3y7RUcdH14n83XlU btRqeJwsfa3bIdoCOKS8GCYfE7CFS+vlSkO+7XN+/eFsrDPk14cJHaZ6tYJEbAyWyJTn Gw== Received: from ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (6c.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.108]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3bmfsu1wtg-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 03:56:12 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19B7qkCj019316 for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:10 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3bk2q9a9qe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:09 +0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 19B7u5en39387568 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:06 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7270A4062; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 534CCA4068; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-00db19cc-1f39-11b2-a85c-fed2f2ec2619.ibm.com.com (unknown [9.43.35.55]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 07:56:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Anju T Sudhakar To: fstests@vger.kernel.org Cc: anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: [PATCH 4/4] generic/219: Fix test failure on 64k block size Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 13:25:52 +0530 Message-Id: <20211011075552.196688-5-anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.31.1 In-Reply-To: <20211011075552.196688-1-anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20211011075552.196688-1-anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: j91UgJS-bkMAYsLKsvajrHsRbFrOcFSH X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: j91UgJS-bkMAYsLKsvajrHsRbFrOcFSH X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.182.1,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.391,FMLib:17.0.607.475 definitions=2021-10-11_02,2021-10-07_02,2020-04-07_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=924 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2109230001 definitions=main-2110110043 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org Skip this test on 64k, as 4k as taken as the default block size. Signed-off-by: Anju T Sudhakar --- But I have a Query: This test fails on ext4&xfs with 64k block size. Do we need to rephrase this test to incorporate the 64k bs scenario as well? If not we can skip this test. tests/generic/219 | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/tests/generic/219 b/tests/generic/219 index d3d257f1..d38fd033 100755 --- a/tests/generic/219 +++ b/tests/generic/219 @@ -79,6 +79,11 @@ test_accounting() # real QA test starts here +# Skip this test on 64k block size scenario +bsize=$(_get_block_size $SCRATCH_MNT) +if [ $bsize -ge 4096 ];then + _notrun "Test assumes 4k as the default block size" +fi _scratch_unmount 2>/dev/null _scratch_mkfs >> $seqres.full 2>&1 _scratch_mount "-o usrquota,grpquota" -- 2.24.1