Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+3\/3\]\s+xfstests\s+generic\s+310\:\s+fix\s+common\s+file\s+path\s+and\s+other\s+cleanups\s*$/: 7 ]

Total 7 documents matching your query.

1. [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 18:39:07 +0800
1. add one space between # and test description 2. remove creator/owner info 3. fix common/rc and common/filter path so they can be sourced correctly 4. no need to remove $seq.full cause it's not use
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00128.html (9,374 bytes)

2. Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 09:05:07 -0500
Hi Eryu, Thanks for this cleanup patch. I was going to revert patch "bbaf78c0" which introduced test generic/310 but will wait and see if Zhao will provide more information which could be added to th
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00143.html (10,609 bytes)

3. Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Eryu Guan <eguan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 13:29:13 +0800
Make sense, thanks for the review. I didn't look into the test deeply but I found the test seems to run for hours on my 3.9-rc4 test box, not sure what goes wrong here. Thanks, Eryu
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00150.html (11,432 bytes)

4. Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Zhao Hongjiang <zhaohongjiang37@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 14:16:55 +0800
When I ran it on ext2, ext3 and ext4 which has dir_index feature disabled, I got something like this: EXT3-fs error (device loop1): ext3_readdir: bad entry in directory #34817: rec_len is \ smaller t
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00151.html (11,572 bytes)

5. Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 16:40:30 +1000
So what is the criteria for a test failure? The test body is only reading from the filesystem, so a ro,remount won't cause an obvious failure of the test. Perhaps the test should have more comments i
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00152.html (11,840 bytes)

6. Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Zhao Hongjiang <zhaohongjiang37@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 15:25:49 +0800
There haven't a obvious criteria for a test failure, you should see it from dmesg while you run the test. Yes, i'll add more comments to explain it! Thanks, Zhao Hongjiang
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00157.html (13,451 bytes)

7. Re: [PATCH 3/3] xfstests generic 310: fix common file path and other cleanups (score: 1)
Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 22:00:06 +1000
Which means for most cases (i.e. automated test harnesses), a test failure will go unnoticed. The test *must* detect failures if it is to be useful as a regression test. That's the whole point of a r
/archives/xfs/2013-04/msg00162.html (13,779 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu