| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH V2] xfstests 249: use -F option for xfs_io |
| From: | Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 04 Apr 2011 13:36:00 -0500 |
| Cc: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <4D8A19D4.3080807@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4D8A1795.3080401@xxxxxxxxxx> <4D8A19D4.3080807@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | aelder@xxxxxxx |
On Wed, 2011-03-23 at 11:03 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Test 249 was appearing to pass on ext4, but it wasn't really > exercising the test due to lack of "-F" in the xfs_io arguments. > > Without -F the files were created (oddly enough); neither pwrite > nor sendfile were executed, and the diff of the two (empty) > files passed, resulting in a passed test without testing anything. > > So add the -F, capture the output, and test the result of each > xfs_io invocation. > > Also, when it fails, the diff output is huge. Make diff silent, > but describe the diff failure and exit. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> Looks good. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx> |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix variable set but not used warnings, Alex Elder |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix extent format buffer allocation size, Alex Elder |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfs: exact busy extent tracking, Alex Elder |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfs: fix extent format buffer allocation size, Alex Elder |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |