On Tue, 2009-11-03 at 11:47 +0900, Miao Xie wrote: > Hi,Subrata > > Sorry for the late reply. > > I have no time to do the following job recently. > But don't worry. I will do it before the next release.
Thank you very much Miao. I would like to tell you that many people in my team are using your test cases rigorously. Thanks for the same. Regards-- Subrata > > >>> On 2009-10-26, at 07:26, Subrata Modak wrote: > >>>> We had recently added EXT4 testcases to LTP. As the author of these > >>>> tests mentioned, we saw 2 such failures in subdirectory limit test: > >>>> > >>>> Ext4 subdir limit test > >>>> ext4-subdir-limit 0 TINFO : Num of dirs to create: 65537, Dir > >>>> name > >>>> len: short name Parent dir: mnt_point, Block > >>>> size: 1024 > >>>> mke2fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009) > >>>> tune2fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009) > >>>> Setting test filesystem flag > >>>> /dev/VG1_EXT4/LV1_EXT4: The test_fs flag is set (and ext4 is > >>>> available). > >>>> CLEARED. > >>> You don't need to set the test_fs flag for modern ext4. > >> Miao, > >> > >> Can we change this ? > > Ok, no problem. > > >>>> ext4-subdir-limit 0 TINFO : Num of dirs to create: 65537, Dir > >>>> name > >>>> len: long name Parent dir: mnt_point, Block > >>>> size: 1024 > >>>> mkdir: No space left on device > >>>> ext4-subdir-limit 2 TFAIL : failed to create directories - 19524 > ... > >>>> ext4-subdir-limit 0 TINFO : Num of dirs to create: 65537, Dir > >>>> name > >>>> len: long name Parent dir: mnt_point/sub, > >>>> Block > >>>> size: 1024 > >>>> mkdir: No space left on device > >>>> ext4-subdir-limit 4 TFAIL : failed to create directories - 19483 > ... > >>>> Is this a known issue for EXT4 ? > >>> Creating many long filenames (255 bytes) in a 1kB block filesystem is a > >>> known issue that is not expected to be fixed (at least I'm not aware of > >>> any work being done in this area). A vast majority of filesystems > >>> today are formatted with 4kB blocks (due to disk size) and the > >>> overhead of > >>> managing 1kB block filesystems makes these only marginally used, and it > >>> is also very rare to have applications with such large filenames. > >> Ok. > > I will remove these testcases. > > >> However, it is also accompanied by the following failures in the > >> online-defrag part: > >> ======================================================================================== > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 1, defrag obj: 3, block > >> size: 1024 > >> 71301958656 bytes (71 GB) copied, 2694.12 s, 26.5 MB/s > >> ext4-online-defrag 3 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > ... > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 2, defrag obj: 3, block > >> size: 1024 > >> 71301958656 bytes (71 GB) copied, 2623.31 s, 27.2 MB/s > >> ext4-online-defrag 6 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 3, defrag obj: 1, block > >> size: 1024 > >> ext4-online-defrag 7 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 3, defrag obj: 2, block > >> size: 1024 > >> 41943040 bytes (42 MB) copied, 0.737014 s, 56.9 MB/s > >> ext4-online-defrag 8 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 3, defrag obj: 3, block > >> size: 1024 > >> 71301958656 bytes (71 GB) copied, 2544.39 s, 28.0 MB/s > >> ext4-online-defrag 9 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > >> ... > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 3, defrag obj: 2, block > >> size: 4096 > >> 41943040 bytes (42 MB) copied, 0.306366 s, 137 MB/s > >> ext4-online-defrag 17 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > >> ext4-online-defrag 0 TINFO : defrag type: 3, defrag obj: 3, block > >> size: 4096 > >> 71241666560 bytes (71 GB) copied, 1019.79 s, 69.9 MB/s > >> ext4-online-defrag 18 TFAIL : e4defrag returned failure > >> incrementing stop > >> ======================================================================================== > >> Did you see these failure on your machine ? > > I didn't find these failure on my box. > I need more information to analyse. so I'll make a patch to get > more information later. > > >> Some more points are: > >> > >> 1. Can you please run these tests against the backdrop of the > >> Makefile changes in LTP to see all the build/install/run are > >> executing fine, > > > > Could you please verify this before this release. Let me know a patch if > > you find any discrepancy :-) > > Sorry for that I couldn't do it before the release. > I'll do it before the next release. > > > > >> 2. Can you also please put all the utilities version info at the > >> beginning of the test rather than printing them again and > >> again(like mke2fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009),tune2fs 1.41.9 > >> (22-Aug-2009),dumpe2fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009),dumpe2fs 1.41.9 > >> (22-Aug-2009)) > > > > This can go in the next month release as well, if you do not have time > > to fix now. Else, i have a bug mouth to eat this as well ;-) > > I'll do it before the next release. > > Regards. > Miao > > > > > Regards-- > > Subrata > > > >> Regards-- > >> Subrata > >> > >>>> Following the various system information on which we ran the test: > >>>> 1) uname -a > >>>> Linux 2.6.31 #1 SMP Tue Oct 20 22:57:16 IST 2009 i686 i686 i386 > >>>> GNU/Linux > >>>> > >>>> 2) grep -i ext4 .config > >>>> CONFIG_EXT4_FS=m > >>>> CONFIG_EXT4DEV_COMPAT=y > >>>> CONFIG_EXT4_FS_XATTR=y > >>>> CONFIG_EXT4_FS_POSIX_ACL=y > >>>> CONFIG_EXT4_FS_SECURITY=y > >>>> > >>>> 3) mkfs.ext4 -V > >>>> mke2fs 1.41.9 (22-Aug-2009) > >>>> Using EXT2FS Library version 1.41.9 > >>>> e2fsprogs-1.41.9 > >>>> e2fsprogs-libs-1.41.9 > >>>> > >>>> 4) LTP used: > >>>> Unreleased CVS repository. See the URL below to download: > >>>> http://ltp.sourceforge.net/documentation/how-to/ltp.php#_3.1, > >>>> > >>>> You can also also directly review the attached patch(which added this > >>>> test cases): > >>>> 26_10_2009-(Miao-Xie<[email protected]>)- > >>>> Add_new_testcases_for_ext4_new_features_V3.patch.regenerated, > >>>> > >>>> 5) I used a single 680GB LVM partition to test this. > >>>> > >>>> Kindly let us know your thoughts on this failures. > >>> Cheers, Andreas > >>> -- > >>> Andreas Dilger > >>> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group > >>> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc. > >>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA > >> is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > >> developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > >> ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! > >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference > >> _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
