| To: | Rich Johnston <rjohnston@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enhance ltp/fsx with a timeout option |
| From: | David Sterba <dsterba@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 7 Mar 2013 19:25:25 +0100 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <51378B7F.9090103@xxxxxxx> |
| Mail-followup-to: | dsterba@xxxxxxx, Rich Johnston <rjohnston@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <1358944851-14336-1-git-send-email-dsterba@xxxxxxx> <51378B7F.9090103@xxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | dsterba@xxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2011-07-01) |
Hi, On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 12:31:27PM -0600, Rich Johnston wrote: > I used test 263 to verify that fsx works as expected with the new -T and the > existing -N options. With the -T option of course, test 263 will fail. I > don't suggest that we change existing tests but add new tests which use the > new -T option. Do you have a new test which you intend to use the -T option > that can be submitted with this patch? I understand that changing behaviour of existing checks is not desirable. The -T option to fsx was inspired by the test we used to hunt a bug at 3.8-rc time where 50 concurrent direct io fsx jobs triggered the bug in about 10 minutes or it was considered fine. fsx -q xxxf$x -Z -R -W -r 4096 -w 4096 (http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/22447) I'll send this test integrated into xfstests harness. david |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] Fix typo from commit 0c5e67e4 "xfstests 273: fix a typo", Rich Johnston |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [XFS updates] XFS development tree branch, master, updated. v3.9-rc1-6-g9e5987a, xfs |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enhance ltp/fsx with a timeout option, Rich Johnston |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: enhance ltp/fsx with a timeout option, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |