On 12/22/15 4:12 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Can't we just leverage what fsx already provides? I'm not sure what this >> patch adds on top of that, am I missing something? > > The -S and -D options help narrow down problems somewhat (xfstests > always seems to use a constant seed value), but they don't allow > removing unrelated operations in between or changing the order of > operations. The .fsxops file makes that very easy; I've successfully > used it on a gfs2 bug. Now that you mention it, I guess I've done the same thing in the past as well; I see the difference now. :) -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
