[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] [XM-TEST] block device write verify test 2nd attempt
On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 01:35:35PM +0100, Harry Butterworth wrote: > On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 12:40 +0100, Ewan Mellor wrote: > > On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 11:35:55AM +0100, Harry Butterworth wrote: > > > > > The only difference from the last version of the patch is that the minor > > > version number in configure.ac is incremented. > > > > > > >From the patch: > > > > > > +# This test imports a ram disk device as a physical device into a domU. > > > +# The domU initialises the ram disk with data from /dev/urandom and > > > calculates > > > +# the md5 checksum of the data (using tee as it is written so as to > > > avoid > > > +# reading it back from the device which might potentially mask > > > problems). > > > +# The domU is stopped and the md5 checksum of the data on the device is > > > +# calculated by dom0. The test succeeds if the checksums match, > > > indicating > > > +# that all the data written by domU was sucessfully committed to the > > > device. > > > + > > > > > > This patch also enables tee and fancy head in busybox on the ramdisk. I > > > have tested the patch with both `make existing' where the tests run but > > > the new test fails because the ramdisk is missing tee and fancy head and > > > `make` where the test passes successfully. > > > > Why don't you use dd instead of head -c? > > I tried using dd with a block size of 1 and a count of the right number > of bytes but the test was very slow. I didn't want to assume a 512b > block size and I'm not very good at shell script so didn't manage to > work out how to do it better. dd bs=<number> count=1 should do just fine. > > Why don't you just fix the size of the datablock that you write to the > > ramdisk, instead of determining the current size of the ramdisk with cat > > /dev/hda1 | wc -c? > > I wanted to test writing at the device limits. Sometimes there are off > by one errors that mean you can't write the last sector of a block > device. > > cat | wc -c was the most robust way I could think of for getting the > size. How about blockdev --getsize64 /dev/ram1? Ewan. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |