On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:33 AM Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2018/10/29 下午5:52, Filipe Manana wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 6:31 AM Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> For latest kernel, there is a chance that btrfs/057 reports false
> >> errors.
> >
> > By latest kernel you mean 4.20?
>
> I mean almost all kernels.
So s/For latest kernel/For any recent kernel/ or something like that
which isn't singular.
>
> >
> >>
> >> The false error would look like:
> >> btrfs/057 4s ... - output mismatch (see /home/adam/xfstests-dev/results//btrfs/057.out.bad)
> >> --- tests/btrfs/057.out 2017-08-21 09:25:33.166666666 +0800
> >> +++ /home/adam/xfstests-dev/results//btrfs/057.out.bad 2018-10-29 14:07:28.443651293 +0800
> >> @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
> >> QA output created by 057
> >> 4096 4096
> >> -4096 4096
> >> +28672 28672
> >>
> >> This is related to the fact that "btrfs subvolume sync" (or
> >> vanilla sync) will not ensure orphan (unlinked but still exist) files to
> >> be removed.
> >
> > So when did that happen, which commit introduced the behaviour change?
>
> No behavior change, it's always the case.
> Just not that easy to hit.
>
> Thanks,
> Qu
>
> >
> >>
> >> In fact, for that false error case, if inspecting the fs after umount,
> >> its qgroup number is correct and btrfs check won't report qgroup error.
> >>
> >> To fix the false alerts, just skip any manual qgroup number comparison,
> >> and let fsck done after the test case to detect problem.
> >>
> >> This also elimiate the necessary of using specified mount and mkfs
> >> option, allowing us to improve coverage.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@xxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@xxxxxxxx>
Anyway, looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> tests/btrfs/057 | 17 ++++-------------
> >> tests/btrfs/057.out | 3 +--
> >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057 b/tests/btrfs/057
> >> index b019f4e1..0b5a36d3 100755
> >> --- a/tests/btrfs/057
> >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/057
> >> @@ -33,12 +33,9 @@ _require_scratch
> >> rm -f $seqres.full
> >>
> >> # use small leaf size to get higher btree height.
> >> -run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g --nodesize 4096"
> >> +run_check _scratch_mkfs "-b 1g"
> >>
> >> -# inode cache is saved in the FS tree itself for every
> >> -# individual FS tree,that affects the sizes reported by qgroup show
> >> -# so we need to explicitly turn it off to get consistent values.
> >> -_scratch_mount "-o noinode_cache"
> >> +_scratch_mount
> >>
> >> # -w ensures that the only ops are ones which cause write I/O
> >> run_check $FSSTRESS_PROG -d $SCRATCH_MNT -w -p 5 -n 1000 \
> >> @@ -53,14 +50,8 @@ run_check $FSSTRESS_PROG -d $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1 -w -p 5 -n 1000 \
> >> _run_btrfs_util_prog quota enable $SCRATCH_MNT
> >> _run_btrfs_util_prog quota rescan -w $SCRATCH_MNT
> >>
> >> -# remove all file/dir other than subvolume
> >> -rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/snap1/* >& /dev/null
> >> -rm -rf $SCRATCH_MNT/p* >& /dev/null
> >> -
> >> -_run_btrfs_util_prog filesystem sync $SCRATCH_MNT
> >> -units=`_btrfs_qgroup_units`
> >> -$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG qgroup show $units $SCRATCH_MNT | $SED_PROG -n '/[0-9]/p' \
> >> - | $AWK_PROG '{print $2" "$3}'
> >> +echo "Silence is golden"
> >> +# btrfs check will detect any qgroup number mismatch.
> >>
> >> status=0
> >> exit
> >> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/057.out b/tests/btrfs/057.out
> >> index 60cb92d0..185023c7 100644
> >> --- a/tests/btrfs/057.out
> >> +++ b/tests/btrfs/057.out
> >> @@ -1,3 +1,2 @@
> >> QA output created by 057
> >> -4096 4096
> >> -4096 4096
> >> +Silence is golden
> >> --
> >> 2.18.0
> >>
> >
> >
>
--
Filipe David Manana,
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't — you're right.”
