All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests/btrfs: do not test btrfs/010 with autodefrag
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 16:40:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131001144047.GI18291@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130927134544.GI18681@localhost.localdomain>

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 09:45:44AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:17:55PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > btrfs/010 is going to create a fragmented file, however, with autodefrag
> > this is impossible, so just skip the test when we're with autodefrag.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
> 
> I'd rather you just strip out the autodefrag option if it is there and add it
> back once the test is done (or hell just remove it, mount, and add it back).

I think the test should be skipped if it does not make sense with a
specific mount option rather than temporarily removing it, because then
it looks like the test passes with the option altough it does not.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fusionio.com>
Cc: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests/btrfs: do not test btrfs/010 with autodefrag
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 16:40:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131001144047.GI18291@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130927134544.GI18681@localhost.localdomain>

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 09:45:44AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 01:17:55PM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
> > btrfs/010 is going to create a fragmented file, however, with autodefrag
> > this is impossible, so just skip the test when we're with autodefrag.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Bo <bo.li.liu@oracle.com>
> 
> I'd rather you just strip out the autodefrag option if it is there and add it
> back once the test is done (or hell just remove it, mount, and add it back).

I think the test should be skipped if it does not make sense with a
specific mount option rather than temporarily removing it, because then
it looks like the test passes with the option altough it does not.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-01 14:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-18  5:17 [PATCH] xfstests/btrfs: do not test btrfs/010 with autodefrag Liu Bo
2013-09-18  5:17 ` Liu Bo
2013-09-27 13:45 ` Josef Bacik
2013-09-27 13:45   ` Josef Bacik
2013-10-01 14:40   ` David Sterba [this message]
2013-10-01 14:40     ` David Sterba

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131001144047.GI18291@twin.jikos.cz \
    --to=dsterba@suse.cz \
    --cc=bo.li.liu@oracle.com \
    --cc=jbacik@fusionio.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.