All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Schmidt <list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, alex.btrfs@zadarastorage.com,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add background noise to test 276 (btrfs backref resolving)
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:17:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5148B9E5.5000702@jan-o-sch.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51489BD6.6030504@sandeen.net>

On 19.03.2013 18:09, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Furthermore, this increases two constants which make the test simply cycle a
>> few seconds longer, increasing the chance to hit on something suspicious in
>> case we broke something.
> 
> Normally we don't change existing tests lest new failures look like regressions
> when they aren't, but hey, "btrfs is an experimental filesystem" so maybe it's
> ok in this case.  ;)  At some point when things are settled down, we wouldn't
> want to make a change like this.  But for now it doesn't bother me.

(justification) I thought about adding this modification as a separate
test - and I have no strict objections against doing so. It's just that
I hate duplicating code and I couldn't think of a good way to share all
that code between two individual tests. Plus: We do need the new
version, because it shows backref walking in fact is currently broken,
while the old version would never fail where the new one wouldn't.

Thanks for taking a look!
-Jan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Jan Schmidt <list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, alex.btrfs@zadarastorage.com,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add background noise to test 276 (btrfs backref resolving)
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:17:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5148B9E5.5000702@jan-o-sch.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51489BD6.6030504@sandeen.net>

On 19.03.2013 18:09, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Furthermore, this increases two constants which make the test simply cycle a
>> few seconds longer, increasing the chance to hit on something suspicious in
>> case we broke something.
> 
> Normally we don't change existing tests lest new failures look like regressions
> when they aren't, but hey, "btrfs is an experimental filesystem" so maybe it's
> ok in this case.  ;)  At some point when things are settled down, we wouldn't
> want to make a change like this.  But for now it doesn't bother me.

(justification) I thought about adding this modification as a separate
test - and I have no strict objections against doing so. It's just that
I hate duplicating code and I couldn't think of a good way to share all
that code between two individual tests. Plus: We do need the new
version, because it shows backref walking in fact is currently broken,
while the old version would never fail where the new one wouldn't.

Thanks for taking a look!
-Jan

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

  reply	other threads:[~2013-03-19 19:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-19 16:24 Jan Schmidt
2013-03-19 16:24 ` Jan Schmidt
2013-03-19 17:09 ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-19 17:09   ` Eric Sandeen
2013-03-19 19:17   ` Jan Schmidt [this message]
2013-03-19 19:17     ` Jan Schmidt
2013-03-19 19:31     ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-19 19:31       ` Dave Chinner
2013-03-20 13:20 ` Rich Johnston
2013-03-20 13:20   ` Rich Johnston

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=5148B9E5.5000702@jan-o-sch.net \
    --to=list.btrfs@jan-o-sch.net \
    --cc=alex.btrfs@zadarastorage.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sandeen@sandeen.net \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add background noise to test 276 (btrfs backref resolving)' \
    /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

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.