[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfsdump support for 64K page size

To: Bill Kendall <wkendall@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfsdump support for 64K page size
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:41:15 -0500
Cc: Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx>, xfs-dev <xfs-dev@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4967A73E.9020907@xxxxxxx>
References: <4964C5EF.3060308@xxxxxxx> <4965629C.2000703@xxxxxxx> <20090108222800.GG9448@disturbed> <4967A73E.9020907@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Fri, Jan 09, 2009 at 01:36:30PM -0600, Bill Kendall wrote:
> Once that is done, I suggest we put Dave's original patches in the
> -dev trees. That way it'll have proper attribution as well as commit
> messages with some detail.

The commits were merged back to the -dev trees alredy, and at least
for xfsprogs we already have a commit ontop.  I'd say let's use how
this was handled as a bad example and get over it.

What we should do however is putting dump images of every page
size we can hold of (4k/8k/16k/64k) and maybe both endianesses
into the xfstests repository so we can exercise them as part of
the normal QA procedure.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>