Bug 756365

Summary:	[xfs/xfstests 262] quota values reported were double what they should have been
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5	Reporter:	Eryu Guan <eguan>
Component:	xfsprogs	Assignee:	Eric Sandeen <esandeen>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Petr Beňas <pbenas>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	5.8	CC:	branto, dchinner, esandeen, pbenas, pstehlik
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	xfsprogs-2.10.2-8.el5	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:	749435	Environment:
Last Closed:	2013-01-29 13:01:45 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:	749435
Bug Blocks:

Comment 1 RHEL Program Management 2012-04-02 13:12:06 UTC

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

Comment 5 Petr Beňas 2012-08-06 14:23:02 UTC

Reproduced in xfsprogs-2.10.2-7.el5 and verified in xfsprogs-2.10.2-8.el5.

Comment 6 Eryu Guan 2012-10-16 10:25:58 UTC

Hi Eric, I found that on xen kernel the hard limit is zero, xfsprogs-2.10.2-7.el5 and xfsprogs-2.10.2-8.el5 got the same result, is that an issue? Thanks!

--- 262.out     2012-08-30 17:32:03.000000000 +0800
+++ 262.out.bad 2012-10-16 18:20:35.000000000 +0800
@@ -1,2 +1,4 @@
 QA output created by 262
 Silence is golden.
+hard limit 0 bytes, expected 524288000
+hard limit 0 bytes, expected 524288000
Ran: 262
Failures: 262

Comment 7 Eric Sandeen 2012-10-17 15:57:34 UTC

Eryu, I'm not sure what to make of that.  Which xen kernel was it exactly (which arch etc?)

Comment 10 errata-xmlrpc 2013-01-29 13:01:45 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0205.html