Josef, Eric, On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:15:13AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 7/26/13 11:12 AM, Ben Myers wrote: > > Hey Josef, > > > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 03:07:27PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > >> I test some of the different mkfs options for btrfs, one set doesn't work > >> properly with small file systems, so the fs won't mount. This is fine from a > >> btrfs point of view, but tests that fail to mount the scratch fs will run > >> anyway, so if it's a "fill the fs" sort of test this will wreak havoc. To fix > >> this just error out of _scratch_mount fails. Thanks, > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I noticed that this change causes dmapi tests to try to be run on systems that > > don't have dmapi supported, and they fail. Have you seen this? > > > > Thanks, > > Ben > > I haven't tested either way, but does: > > _mount -t $FSTYP `_scratch_mount_options $*` || _fail "Scratch mount failed" > > work any better? This still fails like so: xfs/142 [failed, exit status 1] - output mismatch (see /root/xfstests/results/xfs/142.out.bad) --- tests/xfs/142.out 2013-05-17 14:23:16.000000000 -0500 +++ /root/xfstests/results/xfs/142.out.bad 2013-07-26 11:31:00.128200302 -0500 @@ -1,232 +1,8 @@ QA output created by 142 -Attribute tests beginning... -Report: success with set #0. -Report: success with set #1. -Report: success with set #2. -Report: success with set #3. -Report: success with set #4. ... (Run 'diff -u tests/xfs/142.out /root/xfstests/results/xfs/142.out.bad' to see the entire diff) Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
