Bug 749525

Summary:	[ext4/xfstests 260] FITRIM start argument overflows
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6	Reporter:	Eryu Guan <eguan>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Lukáš Czerner <lczerner>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Filesystem QE <fs-qe>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	6.3	CC:	esandeen, kzhang, lczerner, rwheeler
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-12-13 18:36:18 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Eryu Guan 2011-10-27 11:07:11 UTC

Description of problem:
xfstests 260 fails on ext4

FSTYP         -- ext4
PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64 fstest 2.6.32-212.el6.x86_64
MKFS_OPTIONS  -- lazy_itable_init /dev/sdb2
MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr -o context=system_u:object_r:nfs_t:s0 /dev/sdb2 /mnt/testarea/scratch

260      [failed, exit status 1] - output mismatch (see 260.out.bad)
--- 260.out     2011-10-20 19:11:39.000000000 +0800
+++ 260.out.bad 2011-10-27 18:53:53.931268221 +0800
@@ -11,4 +11,5 @@
 [+] Default length with start set (should succeed)
 [+] Length beyond the end of fs (should succeed)
 [+] Length beyond the end of fs with start set (should succeed)
+It seems that fs logic handling start argument overflows
 Test done

I used -E lazy_itable_init mkfs option here to make sure it's not introduced by bug 696559.

This is not a regression, 6.1 GA kernel fails too
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-2.6.32-212.el6

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. prepare two partitions on SSD which supports TRIM(lvm over SSD won't work)
2. check 260
3.
  
Actual results:
test fail

Expected results:
test pass

Additional info:

Comment 2 Eric Sandeen 2011-10-27 17:25:02 UTC

Lukas, mind taking this one?

Comment 3 Lukáš Czerner 2011-10-28 14:07:11 UTC

Oh, they have used xfstest I have written just recently to find exactly this bug upstream, who would have thought of that ?:) Yes, I'll take it. The change is not upstream yet (due to bigalloc changes).

Comment 4 Eric Sandeen 2011-10-28 14:48:24 UTC

Yep, xfstests can be fun that way.  :)

Comment 5 RHEL Program Management 2011-11-01 05:47:34 UTC

Since RHEL 6.2 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains
unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as
exception or blocker.

Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the
next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Comment 6 RHEL Program Management 2011-12-13 15:00:20 UTC

This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion
in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has 
requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed 
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.

Comment 7 Lukáš Czerner 2011-12-13 18:36:18 UTC


*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 767219 ***