On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 09:55:26AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2024 at 10:23:18AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 11:08:37PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 05:47:32PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > > > From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > The exchange-range implementation is now completely separate from the > > > > old swapext ioctl. We're deprecating the old swapext ioctl, so let's > > > > move this test to use exchangerange. > > > > > > Do we really want to lost the swapext test coverage? Even if it is > > > deprecated, it will be with us for a long time. My vote for copy and > > > pasting this into a new test for exchrange. > > > > Yeah, you're right that we should retain this test for the old swapext > > ioctl. I'll fork the test into two -- one for swapext, another for > > exchangerange. > > ...except that the swapext ioctl doesn't support swapping forks if quota > is enabled and any of the user/group/project ids are different: > > > /* User/group/project quota ids must match if quotas are enforced. */ > if (XFS_IS_QUOTA_ON(ip->i_mount) && > (!uid_eq(VFS_I(ip)->i_uid, VFS_I(tip)->i_uid) || > !gid_eq(VFS_I(ip)->i_gid, VFS_I(tip)->i_gid) || > ip->i_projid != tip->i_projid)) > return -EINVAL; > > I'll amend the commit message: > > "There's no point in maintaining this test for the legacy swapext code > because it returns EINVAL if any quota is enabled and the two files have > different user/group/project ids. Originally I had forward ported the > old swapext ioctl to use commitrange as its backend, but that will be > dropped in favor of porting xfs_fsr to use commitrange directly." Hi Darrick, I can help to change the patch [4/10] and [10/10] if you need. But for this one, will you re-send this patch or the whole patchset? Thanks, Zorro > > --D >
