On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, Tomas Racek wrote:
> Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:24:26 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Tomas Racek <tracek@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: Change fstrim behaviour to be consistent with
> upstream version
>
> > If we have duplicate code (i.e. a copy of the upstream utility) or
> > the local tool can be completely replaced by the upstream tool,
> > then we should use upstream and remove the local copy completely.
> > Distros have been shipping fstrim for long enough now that most
> > people running testing on upstream kernels will have it installed...
> >
>
> OK, I'll create the patch which drops local version.
>
> > Adding a _require_fstrim() function that checks for the upstream
> > version of fstrim to be installed for each test that requires it
> > would go along with this.
>
> Did you mean something like
>
> _require_fstrim()
> {
> which fstrim &>/dev/null || _notrun "This test requires fstrim utility."
> }
>
> in common.rc or locally in each test?
I think that having this test in common.rc along with others is definitely
better option.
And while you're in it, you can also add another _require_ for the
actual FITRIM support. Although calling it _require_fitrim seems
rather confusing, so maybe _require_batched_discard with the device
as an argument ?
Thanks!
-Lukas
>
> Thanks for comments!
>
> Tomas
>
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
