| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: fsck scratch device if it got used |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:06:16 -0500 |
| Cc: | xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <50B7B0AB.6040406@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <50B7B0AB.6040406@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:59:55PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > This will cause the $SCRATCH_DEV to be fscked if it > was used in the prior test. Without this I don't > think it gets done unless specifically requested > by the test. This one looks good. > Also recreate lost+found/ in one test so that e2fsck > doesn't complain. This one I can't make any sense of. Care to send it separately with a good explanation? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: _fail in _scratch_mkfs_sized if device is too small, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2/4 V2] xfs: byte range granularity for XFS_IOC_ZERO_RANGE, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | [PATCH] xfstests: fsck scratch device if it got used, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: fsck scratch device if it got used, Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |