On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:52:40AM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: [...] >> > > Are you planning to keep my patch as is or drop the else statement in >> > > the filters? >> >> I was testing your attached patch as is, if you can send a formal patch >> with the else statement dropped that'd be great. > > Your test patch worked fine in my testing. I tested the following > configs with both reflink enabled xfs (which could cover the most test > cases) and overlayfs on top of xfs (both old and new config) > > # kvm-xfstests config > TEST_DEV=/dev/sdc1 > TEST_DIR=/sdc1 > SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/sdc2 > SCRATCH_MNT=/sdc2 > > # djwong config > TEST_DEV=/dev/sdc1 > TEST_DIR=/mnt > SCRATCH_DEV=/dev/sdc2 > SCRATCH_MNT=/opt > Cool. I sent you the formal patch without the else statement. It passed my kvm-xfstests run with new overlay config (along with your patch) -- 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
