On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:02:38AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 04:48:37PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 07:32:31AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote: > > > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/259 b/tests/xfs/259 > > > > index 16c1935..3150ff3 100755 > > > > --- a/tests/xfs/259 > > > > +++ b/tests/xfs/259 > > > > @@ -51,9 +51,7 @@ testfile=$TEST_DIR/259.image > > > > # Test various sizes slightly less than 4 TB. Need to handle different > > > > # minimum block sizes for CRC enabled filesystems, but use a small log so we > > > > # don't write lots of zeros unnecessarily. > > > > -xfs_info $TEST_DIR | _filter_mkfs 2> $tmp.mkfs > /dev/null > > > > -. $tmp.mkfs > > > > > > This tests the configuration of the test device, which is not > > > controlled by the test harness, so can be different to the > > > configuration being used for the scratch device. > > > > > > > -if [ $_fs_has_crcs -eq 1 ]; then > > > > +if [ $XFS_MKFS_CRC_DEFAULT -eq 1 ]; then > > > > > > IOWs, this is not an not equivalent test. > > > > And I think that's the whole point of this change :) > > > > Previously it tested what the TEST_DIR did, which was wrong for this > > test. Now it tests what mkfs does by default (including for the scratch > > dev), which is what we really want here. > > Which is not at all clear from the patch description. > > Seriously, though, this does not belong in common/config. We already > have a helper function to check what mkfs supports (i.e. > _scratch_mkfs_xfs_supported()), and if we just want a bare check > then factor this into a _mkfs_xfs_supported() and supply the > parameters specific to the test. Will do. > > Indeed, this is basically what we do with _require_xfs_mkfs_crc(); > the same thing should be done, but without the "notrun" if -m crc > s not supported... Thanks for reviewing! Eryu _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
