On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 4:33 PM <jeffm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@xxxxxxxx>
>
> btrfs/125, btrfs/148, btrfs/157, and btrfs/158 test for raid56
> behavior. We shouldn't run if the kernel doesn't have support for them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@xxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Filipe Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxx>
Looks good. Since it's a btrfs specific change/fix, it would have been
a good idea to cc linux-btrfs.
> ---
> tests/btrfs/125 | 1 +
> tests/btrfs/148 | 1 +
> tests/btrfs/157 | 1 +
> tests/btrfs/158 | 1 +
> 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/125 b/tests/btrfs/125
> index 5ac68b67..847fa62a 100755
> --- a/tests/btrfs/125
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/125
> @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ _supported_os Linux
> _require_scratch_dev_pool 3
> _test_unmount
> _require_loadable_fs_module "btrfs"
> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56
>
> _scratch_dev_pool_get 3
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/148 b/tests/btrfs/148
> index d0e554c2..3fd8616f 100755
> --- a/tests/btrfs/148
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/148
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ _supported_os Linux
> _require_scratch
> _require_scratch_dev_pool 4
> _require_odirect
> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56
>
> _scratch_dev_pool_get 4
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/157 b/tests/btrfs/157
> index d9ea4b7b..7f75c407 100755
> --- a/tests/btrfs/157
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/157
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ _supported_fs btrfs
> _supported_os Linux
> _require_scratch_dev_pool 4
> _require_btrfs_command inspect-internal dump-tree
> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56
>
> get_physical_stripe0()
> {
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/158 b/tests/btrfs/158
> index fe2dd956..603e8bea 100755
> --- a/tests/btrfs/158
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/158
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ _supported_fs btrfs
> _supported_os Linux
> _require_scratch_dev_pool 4
> _require_btrfs_command inspect-internal dump-tree
> +_require_btrfs_fs_feature raid56
>
> get_physical_stripe0()
> {
> --
> 2.16.4
>
--
Filipe David Manana,
“Whether you think you can, or you think you can't — you're right.”
