On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 05:27:04PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 06:54:41AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Can we please just kill the goddamn test? Just waiting for the > > xfsprogs 6.8 resync to submit the static_asserts for libxfs that > > will handle this much better. > > I'll be very happen when we scuttle xfs/122 finally. > > However, in theory it's still be useful for QA departments to make sure > that xfsprogs backports (HA!) don't accidentally break things. > > IOWs, I advocate for _notrunning this test if xfsprogs >= 6.8 is > detected, not removing it completely. > > Unless someone wants to chime in and say that actually, nobody backports > stuff to old xfsprogs? (We don't really...) Well, who is going to backport changes to the on-disk format in a way that is complex enough to change strutures, and not also backport the patch to actually check the sizes? Sounds like a weird use case to optimize for.
