[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Anyone have test cases for SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA?

To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Anyone have test cases for SEEK_HOLE/SEEK_DATA?
From: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:28:41 -0500
Cc: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20120918181556.GC28689@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <nsxa9wojdcd.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20120918064039.GS11511@dastard> <50588898.6050802@xxxxxxx> <20120918181556.GC28689@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Hey Ted,

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 02:15:56PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 09:43:36AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote:
> > xfstest 285 and 286 (I believe these tests were only in the OSS
> > version and not in the kernel.org developers version of xfstests).
> Could you clarify what the relationship is between the OSS xfstests
> tree and the one on kernel.org?  Is the OSS tree always ahead of the
> kernel.org tree (i.e., are the commits in the OSS tree a superset of
> the ones in the kernel.org tree)?

The trees on kernel.org are being retired.  I'm not sure what Christoph is
going to do with the kernel.org repos, but expect new changes to go directly
into the xfstests repo on oss.sgi.com.

> I had been under the impression that commits flowed from the
> kernel.org tree to the OSS tree, but it sounds like I was misinformed
> on that point?

Your impression is just a few days out of date.  See:



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