On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:51:46AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:50:00AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > Hey, Darrick, I noticed this while writing up a generic xfstest to test
> > > that the Btrfs swap support patches don't allow a swapfile with holes.
> > > It'd be nice if we were all consistent :) This is based on
> > > xfs-linux/for-next. Feel free to fold it in to your patch or apply it
> > > separately as you see fit. Thanks!
> >
> > I sent a testcase of my own ("generic: test swapfile creation,
> > activation, and deactivation") a while back; would you mind sending out
> > yours so we can combine them into a single testcase?
>
> Wasn't the desire to support holes the rationale for the Aleksei
> version of the iomap swapfile patch?
Ah, so it was. FWIW I'm not sure why you'd /want/ a holey swapfile?
TBH my motivation for iomap swapfile is purely to remove bmap callers. :)
--D
> --
> 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
--
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
