From: Allison Henderson Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2 v8] XFS TESTS: ENOSPC Punch Hole Test Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:09:52 -0700 Message-ID: <4E24CB50.7020506@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1310946766-30217-1-git-send-email-achender@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1311026953.2790.49.camel@doink> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com To: aelder@sgi.com Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1311026953.2790.49.camel@doink> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On 07/18/2011 03:09 PM, Alex Elder wrote: > On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 16:52 -0700, Allison Henderson wrote: >> This patch set adds the ENOSPC test that was used for ext4 punch hole testing. >> This test will verify that a hole can be punched even when the disk is full. >> Reserved blocks should be used to complete the operation when there is not blocks >> to further fragment the file. >> >> Because punching a hole does not always require extra blocks, there needs to >> be several iterations of punching holes, and then filling the file system to 100% >> usage before it is forced to grow the tree in order to handle the fragmentation. >> The growing of the tree is what would cause ENOSPC if not for the use of reserved blocks. > > I have reviewed both of your updated patches. They > both look good to me. I'll give it another day or > two for others to comment if they like, but unless > someone suggests changes I'll commit this for you. > > Reviewed-by: Alex Elder > Alrighty then, sounds good to me. Thanks Alex! Allison Henderson