On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 03:24:31PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 11:33:25AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > This tests checks that the per-inode DAX flag is either reject > > or sticks around, and that rapidly setting/clearing it will not > > crash the kernel. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> > > Does this test make sense when filesystem was mounted without dax > option? I saw these failures when testing on normal block device without > dax mount option. I think the first part that tries to set it makes sense everywhere, but we should also _notrun for this case and not just for EINVAL. That being said: right now I don't understand at all where the EIO when setting the flag comes from, let me figure out where it is. And thinking about it - why would we not allow setting the flag, especially given that right now it doesn't have a meaning either with or without DAX.. -- 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
