On 3/20/15 1:59 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 3/20/15 1:56 PM, Zach Brown wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 11:13:47AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> Replace every explicit mount/umount of scratch or test devices >>> with helper functions. This allows the next patch to add in hooks >>> to these functions in order to set up & tear down overlayfs on >>> every mount/umount. >> >> Yeah, I don't know about this. >> >> For nfs testing we don't setup xfstests to test xfs on block devices and >> then then magically configure nfs to export and mount it on the side. >> >> Wouldn't we treat overlayfs the same way? It'd be its own fstype whose >> underlying resources are fs paths? > > Yeah, maybe I need to rethink it. TBH, I'm not really clear on how > nfs gets set up in fstests, but I guess I should look. Hrmph, well (talking to the duck, here) - nfs & cifs have no mkfs, no fs check, etc. Overlayfs tests really should, I think. So it's not quite like the net-fs tests. Maybe what we need is an "FSTYP=overlayfs" but but another type for the underlying filesystem. And then that starts to look, I think, a lot like what I sent... -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fstests" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
