On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 02:05:32AM +0000, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote:
>> This change adds some new tests for btrfs' incremental send feature.
>> These are all related with inverting the parent-child relationship
>> of directories, and cover the cases:
>> * when the new parent didn't get renamed (just moved)
>> * when a child file of the former parent gets renamed too
>> These new cases are fixed by the following btrfs linux kernel patches:
>> * "Btrfs: more send support for parent/child dir relationship inversion"
>> * "Btrfs: fix send dealing with file renames and directory moves"
>> Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana <fdmanana@xxxxxxxxx>
> Rather than modifying 030 which will cause it to fail on kernels
> where it previously passed, can you factor out the common code and
> create a new test with the additional coverage?
> i.e. the rule of thumb is that once a test is "done" we don't go
> back and modify it in significant ways - we write a new unit test
> that covers the new/extended functionality. Redundancy in unit tests
> is not a bad thing...
Right. The only reason I did this, instead of a new test file, is that
because the former fix which btrfs/030 relates to is not yet in any
kernel release. Given this fact, what do you think?
> Dave Chinner
Filipe David Manana,
"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."