| Message ID | 1425000227-69601-1-git-send-email-jaegeuk@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 2/26/15 7:23 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > The f2fs provides 64KB size with 0 data after fsync was done to directory file. > > Cc: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> > --- > tests/generic/065 | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/generic/065 b/tests/generic/065 > index b5a296d..3d2b437 100755 > --- a/tests/generic/065 > +++ b/tests/generic/065 > @@ -139,6 +139,10 @@ ext3) > # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0xff > [ $hello_digest == "ecb99e6ffea7be1e5419350f725da86b" ] && digest_ok=yes > ;; > +f2fs) > + # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0 > + [ $hello_digest == "fcd6bcb56c1689fcef28b57c22475bad" ] && digest_ok=yes > + ;; whoa... I will admit to having poorly reviewed this test. Given that this file was never fsynced, I don't think the test should be looking at file contents *at all* I'll do an ex post facto review, I think, and really, I think all of the above should just be removed from the test. Without fsync, we don't know what's in the file. (ext3 could be mounted with writeback mode, for example). -Eric > *) > # an empty file > [ $hello_digest == "d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e" ] && digest_ok=yes > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:45:59 -0600 > From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> > To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, > Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] generic/065: f2fs serves 64KB size with zero data > > On 2/26/15 7:23 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > The f2fs provides 64KB size with 0 data after fsync was done to directory file. > > > > Cc: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> > > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> > > --- > > tests/generic/065 | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/tests/generic/065 b/tests/generic/065 > > index b5a296d..3d2b437 100755 > > --- a/tests/generic/065 > > +++ b/tests/generic/065 > > @@ -139,6 +139,10 @@ ext3) > > # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0xff > > [ $hello_digest == "ecb99e6ffea7be1e5419350f725da86b" ] && digest_ok=yes > > ;; > > +f2fs) > > + # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0 > > + [ $hello_digest == "fcd6bcb56c1689fcef28b57c22475bad" ] && digest_ok=yes > > + ;; > > whoa... I will admit to having poorly reviewed this test. Given that this file was > never fsynced, I don't think the test should be looking at file contents *at all* > I'll do an ex post facto review, I think, and really, I think all of the above should > just be removed from the test. Without fsync, we don't know what's in the file. > (ext3 could be mounted with writeback mode, for example). wow :D Different mdsums for different file systems and "file 'hello' has expected size and content" You have to have some fun from time to time ;) I can not tell whether the content of the file is important, or whether the explicit fsync on the file defeats the purpose of the test, but the easier would be to just fsync the file and then print out md5sum since it should be always the same no matter what file system you use. Or we can just not test the content of the file at all. But regardless of the decision we do not need this patch. Felipe what would be the best solution ? Thanks! > > -Eric > > > *) > > # an empty file > > [ $hello_digest == "d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e" ] && digest_ok=yes > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:45:59 -0600 >> From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> >> To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> >> Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, >> Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] generic/065: f2fs serves 64KB size with zero data >> >> On 2/26/15 7:23 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: >> > The f2fs provides 64KB size with 0 data after fsync was done to directory file. >> > >> > Cc: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> >> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> >> > --- >> > tests/generic/065 | 4 ++++ >> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/tests/generic/065 b/tests/generic/065 >> > index b5a296d..3d2b437 100755 >> > --- a/tests/generic/065 >> > +++ b/tests/generic/065 >> > @@ -139,6 +139,10 @@ ext3) >> > # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0xff >> > [ $hello_digest == "ecb99e6ffea7be1e5419350f725da86b" ] && digest_ok=yes >> > ;; >> > +f2fs) >> > + # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0 >> > + [ $hello_digest == "fcd6bcb56c1689fcef28b57c22475bad" ] && digest_ok=yes >> > + ;; >> >> whoa... I will admit to having poorly reviewed this test. Given that this file was >> never fsynced, I don't think the test should be looking at file contents *at all* >> I'll do an ex post facto review, I think, and really, I think all of the above should >> just be removed from the test. Without fsync, we don't know what's in the file. >> (ext3 could be mounted with writeback mode, for example). > > wow :D > > Different mdsums for different file systems and > > "file 'hello' has expected size and content" > > You have to have some fun from time to time ;) My bad. > > I can not tell whether the content of the file is important, or > whether the explicit fsync on the file defeats the purpose of the > test, but the easier would be to just fsync the file and then print > out md5sum since it should be always the same no matter what file > system you use. I added this check because while doing the btrfs fix I came into a scenario where the file's metadata was inconsistent (i.e. the dir fsync would cause metadata inconsistency for non-empty child files). This was detected by fsck alone, but then I added this check anyway. > > Or we can just not test the content of the file at all. But > regardless of the decision we do not need this patch. > > Felipe what would be the best solution ? (Felipe -> Filipe :)) I think explicitly fsyncing the file, after fsyncing the directory, and then check its md5sum/content is a good thing to test. Like this we know there's only one expected result for all filesystems. I'll send a patch for that soon. thanks > > Thanks! > >> >> -Eric >> >> > *) >> > # an empty file >> > [ $hello_digest == "d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e" ] && digest_ok=yes >> > >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored > by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all > things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to > news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the > conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ > _______________________________________________ > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015, Filipe David Manana wrote: > Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:31:02 +0000 > From: Filipe David Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com> > To: Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> > Cc: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>, Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com>, > Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, > fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/2] generic/065: f2fs serves 64KB size with > zero data > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > >> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:45:59 -0600 > >> From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net> > >> To: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> > >> Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, > >> Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] generic/065: f2fs serves 64KB size with zero data > >> > >> On 2/26/15 7:23 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > >> > The f2fs provides 64KB size with 0 data after fsync was done to directory file. > >> > > >> > Cc: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> > >> > Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> > >> > --- > >> > tests/generic/065 | 4 ++++ > >> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > >> > > >> > diff --git a/tests/generic/065 b/tests/generic/065 > >> > index b5a296d..3d2b437 100755 > >> > --- a/tests/generic/065 > >> > +++ b/tests/generic/065 > >> > @@ -139,6 +139,10 @@ ext3) > >> > # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0xff > >> > [ $hello_digest == "ecb99e6ffea7be1e5419350f725da86b" ] && digest_ok=yes > >> > ;; > >> > +f2fs) > >> > + # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0 > >> > + [ $hello_digest == "fcd6bcb56c1689fcef28b57c22475bad" ] && digest_ok=yes > >> > + ;; > >> > >> whoa... I will admit to having poorly reviewed this test. Given that this file was > >> never fsynced, I don't think the test should be looking at file contents *at all* > >> I'll do an ex post facto review, I think, and really, I think all of the above should > >> just be removed from the test. Without fsync, we don't know what's in the file. > >> (ext3 could be mounted with writeback mode, for example). > > > > wow :D > > > > Different mdsums for different file systems and > > > > "file 'hello' has expected size and content" > > > > You have to have some fun from time to time ;) > > My bad. > > > > > I can not tell whether the content of the file is important, or > > whether the explicit fsync on the file defeats the purpose of the > > test, but the easier would be to just fsync the file and then print > > out md5sum since it should be always the same no matter what file > > system you use. > > I added this check because while doing the btrfs fix I came into a > scenario where the file's metadata was inconsistent (i.e. the dir > fsync would cause metadata inconsistency for non-empty child files). > This was detected by fsck alone, but then I added this check anyway. > > > > > Or we can just not test the content of the file at all. But > > regardless of the decision we do not need this patch. > > > > Felipe what would be the best solution ? > > (Felipe -> Filipe :)) Ah sorry about that Filipe :) > > I think explicitly fsyncing the file, after fsyncing the directory, > and then check its md5sum/content is a good thing to test. Like this > we know there's only one expected result for all filesystems. I'll > send a patch for that soon. Great, thanks! -Lukas > > thanks > > > > > Thanks! > > > >> > >> -Eric > >> > >> > *) > >> > # an empty file > >> > [ $hello_digest == "d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e" ] && digest_ok=yes > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in > >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored > > by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all > > things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to > > news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the > > conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list > > Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel > > > >
diff --git a/tests/generic/065 b/tests/generic/065 index b5a296d..3d2b437 100755 --- a/tests/generic/065 +++ b/tests/generic/065 @@ -139,6 +139,10 @@ ext3) # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0xff [ $hello_digest == "ecb99e6ffea7be1e5419350f725da86b" ] && digest_ok=yes ;; +f2fs) + # a 64Kb file, with all bytes having the value 0 + [ $hello_digest == "fcd6bcb56c1689fcef28b57c22475bad" ] && digest_ok=yes + ;; *) # an empty file [ $hello_digest == "d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e" ] && digest_ok=yes
The f2fs provides 64KB size with 0 data after fsync was done to directory file. Cc: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org> --- tests/generic/065 | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)