xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add _require_freeze and minor cleanups

To: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add _require_freeze and minor cleanups
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 15:20:45 -0500
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20120921195921.GB1140@xxxxxxx>
References: <505A4D04.2080105@xxxxxxxxxx> <20120921163827.GA1140@xxxxxxx> <505C9A35.5000404@xxxxxxxxxx> <20120921195921.GB1140@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
On 9/21/12 2:59 PM, Ben Myers wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:47:49AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 9/21/12 11:38 AM, Ben Myers wrote:
>>> Hey Eric,
>>>

...

>>> Pretty good idea to generalize _require_freeze.  It looks like xfs_freeze 
>>> is a
>>> script that uses xfs_io which uses xfsctl XFS_IOC_FREEZE.  So isn't what you
>>> have here xfs specific?  It wouldn't work for the other filesystems that
>>> implement s_op.freeze_fs:
>>
>> It got elevated to a generic ioctl:
>>
>> fs/xfs/xfs_fs.h:
>> /*      XFS_IOC_FREEZE            -- FIFREEZE   119      */
>> /*      XFS_IOC_THAW              -- FITHAW     120      */
>>
>> to:
>>
>> include/linux/fs.h:
>> #define FIFREEZE        _IOWR('X', 119, int)    /* Freeze */
>> #define FITHAW          _IOWR('X', 120, int)    /* Thaw */
> 
> Ah, great.  I see it now.  It looks like test 119 is also using freeze.  
> Should
> that one also _require_freeze?

Since it's xfs-specific, I didn't think it was necessary, but it could.

-Eric

> Reviewed-by: Ben Myers <bpm@xxxxxxx>
> 

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