From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q8EB4ZdY079472 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 06:04:35 -0500 Received: from oproxy8-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy8-pub.bluehost.com [69.89.22.20]) by cuda.sgi.com with SMTP id fcibcVWHhh3FbFZF for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2012 04:05:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <50530F83.3070204@tao.ma> Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 19:05:39 +0800 From: Tao Ma MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: make 275 xfs specific. References: <1336230429-2939-1-git-send-email-tm@tao.ma> <20120505233744.GE25351@dastard> <4FA692B7.9040006@tao.ma> <504A511A.8090209@sandeen.net> <504EA0C2.2060601@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <504EA0C2.2060601@sandeen.net> 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 Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On 09/11/2012 10:24 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 9/7/12 2:55 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 5/6/12 10:03 AM, Tao Ma wrote: >>> On 05/06/2012 07:37 AM, Dave Chinner wrote: >>>> On Sat, May 05, 2012 at 11:07:09PM +0800, Tao Ma wrote: >>>>> From: Tao Ma >>>>> >>>>> In my test with ext4, 275 can't pass because ext4 >>>>> can create a 8k file in the end not like what xfs >>>>> does. So make this test case xfs only for now. >>>> >>>> It's not an XFS specific test - it's a test that is supposed to test >>>> POSIX write behaviour. i.e. if the filesystem is full, and then you >>>> free 4k of space, then an 8k write should only be able to write 4k, >>>> yes? >>> Yes, but it doesn't work as expected for ext4. >> >> Came across this thread again. I had patches on the list a while ago >> to fix it up. >> >> [PATCH V2] xfstests: make 275 pass >> >> But it never got fully reviewed or merged. :( > > It's reviewed & merged now. Does it fix things for you? (I hope?) No, but much better. It removes "lost+found" after mkfs, so the fsck will complain about it. So I have created the corresponding patch for it, and now the test case pass. Please see my patch "xfstests: 275, Don't remove all the files in SCRATCH_MNT". Thanks Tao _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs