On 9/6/13 2:42 PM, Eric Whitney wrote: > Generic/300 fails when run on a test filesystem that does not support > fallocate(), as in the case of an ext4 filesystem created without the > extent feature. It uses fio's falloc ioengine to generate part of its > I/O load. > > Verify that the test filesystem supports fallocate() before proceeding > with the test. Also, delete any pre-existing test output to avoid > confusion with old results. Hey Eric - sorry this got missed for review. Since the test doesn't actually use xfs_io it seems like slightly the wrong check, maybe we need a new _require_fio_falloc()? But xfs_io will almost always be installed for someone running xfstests, and the check as you have it will indeed test that the fs can do fallocate; it's just not the most targeted test. It's probably ok, though - a comment about why you _require_xfs_io when xfs_io isn't used might be good. What do you think? -Eric > Signed-off-by: Eric Whitney <enwlinux@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > tests/generic/300 | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tests/generic/300 b/tests/generic/300 > index 7c60728..1ac763b 100755 > --- a/tests/generic/300 > +++ b/tests/generic/300 > @@ -43,6 +43,9 @@ _supported_fs generic > _supported_os Linux > _need_to_be_root > _require_scratch > +_require_xfs_io_falloc > + > +rm -f $seqres.full > > NUM_JOBS=$((4*LOAD_FACTOR)) > BLK_DEV_SIZE=`blockdev --getsz $SCRATCH_DEV` > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
