Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Jan Kara 09584ace12 xfstests: Use qa_user and qa_group for test 219
Test 219 requires a special user. Use $qa_user and $qa_group (added in this
patch) for that purpose instead of hardcoded uid & gid. This also fixes
a false failure when repquota does not report quota for users not in passwd.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
2013-01-04 12:42:02 -06:00
Jan Kara 7f4a2e30b2 xfstests: Improve test 219 to work with different filesystems
Different filesystems account different amount of metadata in quota.
Thus it is impractical to check for a particular amount of space
occupied by a file because there is no right value. Change the test
to verify whether the amount of space is between the expected amount
of space and the expected amount +5%.  The number of files is
checked exactly as previously.

Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
2011-07-20 18:22:09 -05:00
Alex Elder 580b0a9386 xfstests: use a common _filter_scratch function
There are a number of tests that use a shell function called
"filter_scratch" or "_filter_scratch" in order to have the actual
scratch device or mount point show up in test output with a symbolic
name.  There are two sets, each following a slightly different
convention.  Put a common _filter_scratch function definition in
"common.filter" and have all test scripts use that instead.
Choosing one of the two conventions meant that a few test output
files had to be changed.

In addition, add a call to _filter_scratch to test 185, and update
its output accordingly.

Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
2010-10-22 09:13:06 -05:00
Eric Sandeen ae2c20fd77 Add some very basic quota sanity tests for generic filesystems.
This is based on test 108, but uses the generic quota tools,
not xfs_quota, and therefore cannot test project quota.

Also, the IOs are much smaller (48k) so that ext3 won't get into
indirect blocks and throw off the accounting.  This does
assume 4k blocks though.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Lachlan McIlroy <lmcilroy@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
2009-08-10 13:18:39 -05:00