On 8/26/13 12:38 AM, chandan wrote: > On Sunday, August 25, 2013 11:54:30 AM Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Can you explain why this is necessary? >> >> What failures do you see, on what filesystems? > > generic/255 currently fails on Btrfs on a ppc64 machine with 64k page size and > hence 64k block size. > > generic/255 has been written to test the corner cases for 4k block size. I did > try to make it work with variable sized block sizes, But I got stuck > working with md5sum (since we would need two sets of md5sums, due to > _test_generic_punch() being invoked with and without '-k' option per block > size). > > Since 4k block size support for Btrfs on ppc64 is already being worked on, I > think its better to prevent execution of generic/255 for block sizes greater > than 4k. > > Apologies for not including the above description in the patch. It happens. ;) To be honest I haven't really looked at how _test_generic_punch & generic/255 works lately. Just as a sanity check, does it also fail on xfs for 64k block sizes on ppc64? Thanks, -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
