Re: [PATCH] resize2fs: fix overly-pessimistic calculation of minimum size required

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:34:54AM +0400, Dmitry Monakhov wrote:
> > I'm going to have to self-NACK this.  This patch causes the resize2fs
> > regression tests to fail.  (In fact, Dmitry's original patch also
> > causes the resize2fs regression tests to fail.)
>
> Agree, regressions are not acceptable. Can you please spacify
> which tests are failed. As far as i know xfstetsts has no tests
> for resize2fs.

It was 2 of the tests from e2fsprogs's "make check", where off-one
resize2fs regression tests belong.  The xfstests suite is a good place
to test on-line resize functionality, where the bulk of the code that
has to function correctly is in the kernel,, but for testing
functionality which is specific to e2fsprogs, it's better to test it
within the context of e2fsprogs's regression tests.

Anyway, the patch set I sent out fixes up the problem.

	    	      	     	       	  - Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux