On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:16:29PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > So, sooper-s3kr3t internal google stuff that you can't talk about > and may never see the light of day. When it is announced and > released, then let's talk about integration.... Fair enough, I'll carry it as an out-of-tree patch at https://github.com/tytso/xfstests ... for anyone else who might find it useful for their purposes. > xfstests is not designed for validating system call API compliance - > it's for exercising /filesystem implementations/. xfstests assumes > the syscall API is valid and working, and tries to break the > underlying storage implementation. As such, your example really > isn't something you should be using xfstests for - it doesn't test > anything like what is needed to verify that the "VFS emulation" is > valid and complete and working exactly as documented in the linux > man pages. Who says there isn't an underlying file system implementation which we want to test? In fact we *are* using the right tool for the job. (I'm quite aware of the other testing tools that might be available including LTP and others, such as the LSB tests.) Cheers, - Ted -- 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
