xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/4] xfstests: fix fsx fpunch test to actually test for fpunc

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] xfstests: fix fsx fpunch test to actually test for fpunch
From: Allison Henderson <achender@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 11:15:26 -0700
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1309153722-1231-2-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1309153722-1231-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1309153722-1231-2-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
On 06/26/2011 10:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
From: Dave Chinner<dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>

The operation flags parameter to fallocate is the second parameter,
not the last. Hence the fpunch test is actually testing for falloc
support, not fpunch. Somebody needs a brown paper bag.

Also, add a ftruncate call whenthe fpunch succeeds just in case the
file was not already zero sized. Failing to ensure we start with a
zero length file can cause read ops to fail size checks if they
occur before the file is written to be the main test loop.

While there, observe the quiet flag the same as the falloc test
does and have them both emit the warning at the same error level.

Hi there,

Sorry about that, I think this bug was mine. I have tried your patch set on my box, and it appears to run with out problems for me. Thx!

Allison Henderson

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