On 2018/10/29 下午5:43, fdman...@kernel.org wrote:
> From: Filipe Manana <fdman...@suse.com>
> 
> Unless the '-s' option is passed to fssum, it should not detect file holes
> and have their existence influence the computed checksum for a file. This
> tool was added to test btrfs' send/receive feature, so that it checks for
> any metadata and data differences between the original filesystem and the
> filesystem that receives send streams.
> 
> For a long time the test btrfs/007, which tests btrfs' send/receive with
> fsstress, fails sporadically reporting data differences between files.
> However the md5sum/sha1sum from the reported files in the original and
> new filesystems are the same. The reason why fssum fails is because even
> in normal mode it still accounts for number of holes that exist in the
> file and their respective lengths. This is done using the SEEK_DATA mode
> of lseek. The btrfs send feature does not preserve holes nor prealloc
> extents (not supported by the current protocol), so whenever a hole or
> prealloc (unwritten) extent is detected in the source filesystem, it
> issues a write command full of zeroes, which will translate to a regular
> (written) extent in the destination filesystem. This is why fssum reports
> a different checksum. A prealloc extent also counts as hole when using
> lseek.
> 
> For example when passing a seed of 1540592967 to fsstress in btrfs/007,
> the test fails, as file p0/d0/f7 has a prealloc extent in the original
> filesystem (in the incr snapshot).
> 
> Fix this by making fssum just read the hole file and feed its data to the
> digest calculation function when option '-s' is not given. If we ever get
> btrfs' send/receive to support holes and fallocate, we can just change
> the test and pass the '-s' option to all fssum calls.

However this is causing more problem here.

Now since fssum doesn't skip holes, for a super large sparse file, fssum
will try to fill all the holes with zero and spend tons of CPU time
calculating the result.

E.g. when seed = 1550703281.
We will have a PiB level file:
$ ls /mnt/scratch/base/p0/f3 -alh
-rw-rw-rw- 1 1441 2774 666P Feb 13 13:39 /mnt/scratch/base/p0/f3

(well, 666, no wonder this will fail)

But it only takes aroud 1M:
$ du /mnt/scratch/base/p0/f3
1044    /mnt/scratch/base/p0/f3

This is even more annoying than test failure.

Can't we just filter out the fallocate/hole punching part in the test
itself?

Thanks,
Qu

> 
> Signed-off-by: Filipe Manana <fdman...@suse.com>
> ---
>  src/fssum.c | 65 
> +++++--------------------------------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 60 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/fssum.c b/src/fssum.c
> index 5da39abf..f1da72fb 100644
> --- a/src/fssum.c
> +++ b/src/fssum.c
> @@ -224,71 +224,16 @@ int
>  sum_file_data_permissive(int fd, sum_t *dst)
>  {
>       int ret;
> -     off_t pos;
> -     off_t old;
> -     int i;
> -     uint64_t zeros = 0;
> -
> -     pos = lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_CUR);
> -     if (pos == (off_t)-1)
> -             return errno == ENXIO ? 0 : -2;
>  
>       while (1) {
> -             old = pos;
> -             pos = lseek(fd, pos, SEEK_DATA);
> -             if (pos == (off_t)-1) {
> -                     if (errno == ENXIO) {
> -                             ret = 0;
> -                             pos = lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_END);
> -                             if (pos != (off_t)-1)
> -                                     zeros += pos - old;
> -                     } else {
> -                             ret = -2;
> -                     }
> -                     break;
> -             }
>               ret = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
> -             assert(ret); /* eof found by lseek */
> -             if (ret <= 0)
> +             if (ret < 0)
> +                     return -errno;
> +             sum_add(dst, buf, ret);
> +             if (ret < sizeof(buf))
>                       break;
> -             if (old < pos) /* hole */
> -                     zeros += pos - old;
> -             for (i = 0; i < ret; ++i) {
> -                     for (old = i; buf[i] == 0 && i < ret; ++i)
> -                             ;
> -                     if (old < i) /* code like a hole */
> -                             zeros += i - old;
> -                     if (i == ret)
> -                             break;
> -                     if (zeros) {
> -                             if (verbose >= 2)
> -                                     fprintf(stderr,
> -                                             "adding %llu zeros to sum\n",
> -                                             (unsigned long long)zeros);
> -                             sum_add_u64(dst, 0);
> -                             sum_add_u64(dst, zeros);
> -                             zeros = 0;
> -                     }
> -                     for (old = i; buf[i] != 0 && i < ret; ++i)
> -                             ;
> -                     if (verbose >= 2)
> -                             fprintf(stderr, "adding %u non-zeros to sum\n",
> -                                     i - (int)old);
> -                     sum_add(dst, buf + old, i - old);
> -             }
> -             pos += ret;
>       }
> -
> -     if (zeros) {
> -             if (verbose >= 2)
> -                     fprintf(stderr,
> -                             "adding %llu zeros to sum (finishing)\n",
> -                             (unsigned long long)zeros);
> -             sum_add_u64(dst, 0);
> -             sum_add_u64(dst, zeros);
> -     }
> -
> -     return ret;
> +     return 0;
>  }
>  
>  int
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to