From: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: don't assume that falloc_punch implies falloc
	in test 255
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:51:54 -0600
Message-ID: <51363ECA.3090909@sgi.com>
References: <1362506382-26974-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <1362506382-26974-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu>
Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com

On 03/05/2013 11:59 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> As of Linux 3.9-rc1, ext4 will support the punch operation on file
> systems using indirect blocks, but it can not support the fallocate
> operation (since there is no way to mark a block as uninitialized
> using indirect block scheme).  This caused test 255 to fail, since it
> only used _require_xfS_io_falloc_punch assuming that all file systems
> which supported punch can also support fallocate.  Fix this.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
> ---
>   255 | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/255 b/255
> index 0083963..ae1d8e0 100755
> --- a/255
> +++ b/255
> @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ _supported_fs generic
>   _supported_os Linux
>
>   _require_xfs_io_falloc_punch
> +_require_xfs_io_falloc
#rcj looks reasonable to me to add this requirement
>   _require_xfs_io_fiemap
>
>   testfile=$TEST_DIR/255.$$
>

Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>

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