There's filefrag already, and that works, but, it's output is very
inconsistent between various OS release versions, and it has already
meant that we'd needed to adjust tests to account for these little
but insignificant changes. A lot more work than useful. It's even
more changed in el9.
This adds `scoutfs get-fiemap FILE` and prints out block extent
info with flags that we care about as an abbreviated letter: U for
Unwritten, L for Last, and O for Unknown (as in, "offline").
The -P/--physical and -L/--logical options turn off logical or physical
offset display, in case you only want to see the offsets in either
units. You can pass -b/--byte to display offsets and lengths in
byte values. The block size will then be obtained from fstat() of
the queried file (4096 for scoutfs).
I've removed all uses of filefrag from our scoutfs tests. Xfstests
still calls it but their internal diff takes care of that issue.
Where needed and appropriate, the tests are adjusted so that the output
of `scoutfs get-fiemap` is as close as it can to what it used to be,
so that reading the test results allows the quick view of what might
have been going wrong.
There are some output strings I have not bothered to update because
there's no real value to updating every output string to match,
and we just adjust the golden file accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Auke Kok <auke.kok@versity.com>
The wrapper in setattr_more that translates the operations to attr_x
needs to decide whether to ask attr_x to perform a change to any of
the fields passed to it or not. For the date and size fields this
is implicit - we always tell attr_x to change them. For any of the
other fields, it should be explicit.
The only field that is in the struct that this applies to is
data_version. Because the data version field by default is zero,
we use that as condition to decide whether to pass the data_version
down to attr_x.
Previously, the code would always pass a data_version=0 down to attr_x,
triggering one of the validity checks, making it return -EINVAL. We
add a simple test case to test for this issue.
Signed-off-by: Auke Kok <auke.kok@versity.com>
We had a bug where we were creating extent lengths that were rounded up
to the size of the packed extent items instead of being limited by
i_size. As it happens the last setattr_more test would have found it if
I'd actually done the math to check that the extent length was correct.
We add an explicit offline blocks count test because that's what lead us
to notice that the offline extent length was wrong.
Signed-off-by: Zach Brown <zab@versity.com>
We had a bug where offline extent creation during setattr_more just
wasn't making it all the way to persistent items. This adds basic
sanity tests of the setattr_more interface.
Signed-off-by: Zach Brown <zab@versity.com>
Auke Kok
Andy Grover
Zach BrownandZach Brown