From: "Dilger, Andreas" Subject: Re: "make check" broken on maint branch? Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 18:24:09 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20131101032115.GA14263@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: "linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org" To: Theodore Ts'o Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:20515 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751693Ab3KASYQ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Nov 2013 14:24:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20131101032115.GA14263@thunk.org> Content-Language: en-US Content-ID: <874A209423A8FB4EA7A5B608C76EE1A5@intel.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2013/10/31 9:21 PM, "Theodore Ts'o" wrote: >On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 10:35:56AM +0800, Zheng Liu wrote: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:35:25PM +0000, Dilger, Andreas wrote: >> > I tried to add in a "truncate -s $SIZE_2 $TMPFILE", but it complains >>that >> > it isn't able to truncate the file in /tmp to 2TB: >> > >> > truncating `/tmp/e2fsprogs-tmp.OGxb09' at 2199023255552 bytes: File >>too >> > large >> > >> > Testing manually, it seems I'm not allowed to create a file in tmpfs >>larger >> > than 256GB. How large does this file need to be for this test to be >>valid? >> > >> > Anyone else seen these problems, or do I need to dig in further? >> >> Yes, I also can see these problems. > >Hmm.... it works for me. Run while r_64bit_big_expand is running: > >% ls -l tmp >... >24896 -rw-r--r--. 1 tytso tytso 2199023255552 Oct 31 23:17 >e2fsprogs-tmp.pkOcCc >... > >% df /tmp >Filesystem 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on >tmpfs 3216420 26008 3190412 1% /tmp > >What version of the kernel are you running? I am using 3.12-rc5 plus >the ext4 dev tree, so I'm using a pretty recent kernel. It was in the original email - the failing systems are both RHEL6, 2.6.32-358.11.1.el6 (w/4GB RAM) and 2.6.32-279.5.1.el6 (w/ 2GB RAM). Both fail to create files in tmpfs larger than 256GB. >Maybe this is a relatively new feature of tmpfs? If so, I should >probably change the test so that it's a bit more portable on people >using older kernels. Looking at the s_maxbytes value in current kernels shows me that it was changed in v3.0-7280-g285b2c4 and has not been backported to the RHEL 6 kernel that I'm using at least. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Lustre Software Architect Intel High Performance Data Division