On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 11:28:01AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 4/6/17 11:26 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 10:35:26AM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > >> > >> Test fails with ext3/2 when driving with ext4 driver, fiemap changed > >> after umount/mount cycle, then changed back to original result after > >> sleeping some time. An ext4 bug? (cc'ed linux-ext4 list.) > > > > I haven't had time to look at this, but I'm not sure this test is a > > reasonable one on the face of it. > > > > A file system may choose to optimize a file's extent tree for whatever > > reason it wants, whenever it wants, including on an unmount --- and > > that would not be an invalid thing to do. So to have an xfstests that > > causes a test failure if a file system were to, say, do some cleanup > > at mount or unmount time, or when the file is next opened, to merge > > adjacent extents together (and hence change what is returned by > > FIEMAP) might be strange, or even weird --- but is this any of user > > space's business? Or anything we want to enforce as wrong wrong wrong > > by xfstests?
So I was asking for a review from ext4 side instead of queuing it for next xfstests update :) > > I had the same question. If the exact behavior isn't defined anywhere, > I don't know what we can be testing, TBH. Agreed, I was about to ask for the expected behavior today if there was no new review comments on this patch. Thanks for the comments and review! Eryu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
