| 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> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: fix TEST_MNT typos (should be TEST_DIR), Ben Myers |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 0/6 V4] inode32/inode64 allocation changes, Ben Myers |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add _require_freeze and minor cleanups, Ben Myers |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add _require_freeze and minor cleanups, Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |