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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B459C3A5A2 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 12:37:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1EE21881 for ; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 12:36:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="shACxTOd" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728288AbfICMg7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 08:36:59 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f67.google.com ([209.85.208.67]:39962 "EHLO mail-ed1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728122AbfICMg7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Sep 2019 08:36:59 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f67.google.com with SMTP id v38so12499440edm.7 for ; Tue, 03 Sep 2019 05:36:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=X+JOjjC9ZVu192uQtB4c+PagHpVwrX1ckHNApDJzFx4=; b=shACxTOdGhf746uYGbysRNVKvvDBq+FtlkRxg22lR/WWvFgbINsfw97jbqcnipn8d6 7ziGigbhzXm9x7AejOCUflas0/quQhqoNytjxLpCD9bdIKohxu/00WQ3Zmllcxr7iJRL FwXbpOgMj9s47di5YPfJQETREm90LEaoMzY4lXoQ9UyB76yazUk8kp7n1wXbdux79g7Q fSWSoUtLh3GKb03ICbCrYirSWh3uXp3KvEWtLj8q+tm6BaCzXznROjEh5lqVTJolcos8 6l2jnpSFhlTGwFT+N/WHZaQM2APatjKRGNqviGNVy2rAet+ovziIWK9OHAjMm/Br3VI0 rOAA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=X+JOjjC9ZVu192uQtB4c+PagHpVwrX1ckHNApDJzFx4=; b=XXHnr9YCZ1UyR8xv8MP7i/yO/55e9kpINwreXoJNcvPQENE4hiLqzI7I21dLYwZp1x Pj9oh4loF5U3BUcAs80zDML+5FyvtBA9cKS8BrFYd4OgmPJinX2KIi5gFH9op6ZzQ1wm 1W+aykHhSkzaQM4ML4tAQSPpQ4LkVxGK8d1ls6NtZ5BqXb1JEWwjy/zG+5P+5ICSXUs6 MDx4+vaNMf+c8HAZxwiwDJxMqE1JCn0Cl8YU0RTPQ5V8rrSnD1bfdQClCirUFpec+WkF LXrC6GwRDrPodqUEryDyQkza39y4JDpErZ9tUB031oY+DvG3veZR9iWC1ufjY51y82DT MrkA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXD5imOdC21YYwx70ZQc7yHEavim8eNaAED1D4Wv2ESaqadD5ox gWiL1ZV0IQyA163uV+EvvyaKKqHnwnN45yNllEs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwsNfvafGEiRyz40BWvbFExKtfeTVOTJ5DuTi/JgrhmCKiKMbArB4z6BmT03Lr0MgzyGNeEzERLYJg+HPLgs64= X-Received: by 2002:a50:a147:: with SMTP id 65mr17334939edj.241.1567514217476; Tue, 03 Sep 2019 05:36:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190902105909.ah4pi4nwjefygskd@10.255.255.10> In-Reply-To: <20190902105909.ah4pi4nwjefygskd@10.255.255.10> From: Anatoly Pugachev Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 15:36:46 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] blkid: retport block size of a filesystem To: Karel Zak , Mikulas Patocka Cc: util-linux , Mike Snitzer , Heinz Mauelshagen , dm-devel@redhat.com, lvm-devel@redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: util-linux@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 1:59 PM Karel Zak wrote: > Applied (with two small fixes), thanks! Karel, Mikulas, ts/blkid/low-probe started to fail on sparc64 with this patch: blkid: superblocks probing: [97] xfs-log ... OK blkid: superblocks probing: [98] xfs ... FAILED (blkid/low-probe-xfs) but is "OK" on x86_64. $ diff -u expected/blkid/low-probe-xfs output/blkid/low-probe-xfs --- expected/blkid/low-probe-xfs 2019-09-03 12:45:18.779505561 +0300 +++ output/blkid/low-probe-xfs 2019-09-03 14:35:41.569815684 +0300 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -ID_FS_BLOCK_SIZE=512 +ID_FS_BLOCK_SIZE=131072 ID_FS_LABEL=test-xfs ID_FS_LABEL_ENC=test-xfs ID_FS_TYPE=xfs $ md5sum output/blkid/images-fs/xfs.img c4a59d4039b5ed5557e8502ca2906373 output/blkid/images-fs/xfs.img (md5 is the same as on x86_64 test machine) You can use gcc202 sparc64 machine from gcc compile farm for the test. PS: can someone regenerate xfs.img(xz) with more recent XFS filesystem version? $ xfs_info output/blkid/images-fs/xfs.img xfs_info: V1 inodes unsupported. Please try an older xfsprogs. $ dpkg -l xfsprogs ii xfsprogs 5.0.0-1 sparc64 Utilities for managing the XFS filesystem