On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:51:12PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:40:59AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > There are a few xfstests that check the contents of the CoW extent fork > > to make sure it's working properly. How about a compromise -- leave the > > flag in, but return -EINVAL unless CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y ? > > Personally I'd prefer to remove it. Maybe we'll need Dave as a tie > breaker? Well, I kinda see it like reporting delalloc extents - they are in-memory, but we can report them to userspace even though they will change shortly. I don't think it's generally useful, but right now we need all the validation checks we can get. <shrug> Ok, Darrick, let's make it debug only right now so those tests work while we get this code all sorted. And then plan to remove it before we remove the EXPERIMENTAL flag from reflink? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-xfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
