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 (diff)
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 [PATCH] xfstests: add background noise to test 276 (btrfs backref resolving) 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 \
    /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.