Dave Chinner wrote: > I'm not sure this really is a generic test - it's testing an ext4 > specific bug. We've got other generic tests that exercise fallocate, > and some filesystems (like XFS) don't have special bits to say there > are extents beyond EOF and checking a filesystem repeated won't > report any problems. So perhaps if should be '_supported_fs ext4' Oops we're giving conflicting advice :) I thought a test that exercises blocks-past-eof-filling at various boundaries made sense in general, even if the specific regression test is ext4-specific. Seems like at least ocfs2/btrfs might benefit from the basic exercise, so I was recommending that it be generic. I don't think there is any other test that makes a point of allocating X blocks past eof and then filling them exactly, overwriting/extending past them, etc. Seems like a good addition in general. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
