From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:58486 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750775AbeEPPvv (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2018 11:51:51 -0400 Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 08:51:46 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Omar Sandoval , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara , Aleksei Besogonov Subject: Re: [PATCH] iomap: don't allow holes in swapfiles Message-ID: <20180516155146.GA8294@infradead.org> References: <20180516155000.GC23858@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180516155000.GC23858@magnolia> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:50:00AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > Hey, Darrick, I noticed this while writing up a generic xfstest to test > > that the Btrfs swap support patches don't allow a swapfile with holes. > > It'd be nice if we were all consistent :) This is based on > > xfs-linux/for-next. Feel free to fold it in to your patch or apply it > > separately as you see fit. Thanks! > > I sent a testcase of my own ("generic: test swapfile creation, > activation, and deactivation") a while back; would you mind sending out > yours so we can combine them into a single testcase? Wasn't the desire to support holes the rationale for the Aleksei version of the iomap swapfile patch?