Dave Chinner wrote: > On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 07:04:18PM +0200, Felix Janda wrote: > > This patch series does several things related to large file support. > > > > Patches 1-3 enable transparent LFS in the build system and make it > > mandatory. > > > > Patches 4-9 and 12 replace *64 function and structure aliases. > > > > Patches 10 and 11 disable fsr on Mac OS X and do cleanup to enable > > Patch 12. Further cleanup of the portability code is possible later. > > > > Patch 13 makes tranparent LFS also mandatory for all users of libxfs. > > > > Patch 14 finally replaces off64_t by off_t. > > > > > > In comparison to v1: > > > > Patches 1, 3 and 14 are identical to previous patches. Patches 4-8 are > > identical to previous patches, except that some of them are merged. > > Patch 9 was previously send separately from the patch series. Patch > > 13 is identical to a previous patch except for the commit message. The > > other patches are new, grown out of review by Christoph Hellwig. > > > > Felix Janda (14): > > configure: use AC_SYS_LARGEFILE > > configure: error out when LFS does not work > > remove unecessary definitions of _FILE_OFFSET_BITS > > replace [fl]stat64 by equivalent [fl]stat > > replace ftruncate64 by equivalent ftruncate > > replace lseek64 by equivalent lseek > > replace pread64/pwrite64 by equivalent pread/pwrite > > replace sendfile64 by equivalent sendfile > > fadvise.c: replace posix_fadvise64 by equivalent posix_fadvise > > Makefile: disable fsr for Mac OS X > > fsr: remove workaround for statvfs on Mac OS X > > replace statvfs64 by equivalent statvfs > > xfs.h: require transparent LFS for all users > > platform: remove use of off64_t > > So, the patches are fine, and everything works. Problem is, it > screws up xfstests because it changes all the error messages > that are output to stderr and captured by the test harness. > There are quite a few tests that this causes failures for, > and because it's stderr, it's not as simple as just adding a new > filter to do 'sed -e "s/^\(.*\)64\(: .*$\)/\1\2/"' on stderr. Thanks for testing! I can rework the patches to leave stderr unchanged. I guess that this is preferable as opposed to updating the output expected by xfstests since xfstests should be usable with both old and new xfsprogs. > Further, errors returned change, which further screws up xfstests. > e.g. old code gives EFBIG when we try to use offsets beyond the > supported range, this patchset returns EINVAL. That further > complicates any sort of error filtering we'll need to do. I am very surprised that something apart from the error messages has changed. I would be interested to know on what architecture and for which test(s) (where) this happened, if you still remember. > I don't have the time or patience to fix up xfstests for every > change that people want to make and this series is a non-critical > cleanup, so I'm dropping this until the fixups for xfstests are > worked out. I'm not going to get to this for weeks at the current > rate patches are being thrown at me for inclusion, so I'm not > breaking xfstests for everyone while I'm bottlenecked on other, > higher priority changes. That make sense. --Felix _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
