xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 5/8] xfstests: Add fallocate zero range operation to fsstress

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] xfstests: Add fallocate zero range operation to fsstress
From: Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 13:16:20 +0100 (CET)
Cc: linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5310C9F8.20009@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1393603865-26198-1-git-send-email-lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx> <1393603865-26198-5-git-send-email-lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx> <5310C9F8.20009@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23)
On Fri, 28 Feb 2014, Eric Sandeen wrote:

> Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 11:40:08 -0600
> From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] xfstests: Add fallocate zero range operation to
>     fsstress
> 
> On 2/28/14, 10:11 AM, Lukas Czerner wrote:
> > This commit adds fzero operation support for fsstress, which is meant to
> > exercise fallocate FALLOC_FL_ZERO_RANGE support.
> > 
> > Also reorganise the common fallocate code into a single do_fallocate()
> > function and use flags use the right mode.
> > 
> > Also in order to make more obvious which fallocate mode fsstress is
> > testing translate fallocate flags into human readable strings.
> 
> Can you enhance that so that if it's passed a flag which isn't
> in the known array, it prints the leftover values?  Otherwise
> they are silently dropped, which might be confusing.
> 
> Handling the case where a flag is not in the array would future-proof
> it, I think.
> 
> -Eric

Yes, I can do that. The only reason I've left this out was to force
people to actually update it when they update the test with new
flag.

Thanks!
-Lukas

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: [PATCH 5/8] xfstests: Add fallocate zero range operation to fsstress, Lukáš Czerner <=