generic/258 questions (mount issue)...
Michael L. Semon
mlsemon35 at gmail.com
Wed May 22 11:48:14 CDT 2013
On 05/22/2013 12:19 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 5/22/13 11:15 AM, Michael L. Semon wrote:
>> On 05/22/2013 10:10 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> On 5/21/13 10:03 PM, Michael L. Semon wrote:
>> One day, I would like to earn git-log fame by incorporating better
>> support for JFS and especially NILFS2 into xfstests. However,
>> that's a topic for another day. I know that I have uses for both
>> filesystems, but that doesn't mean anybody else does. Their
>> mailing lists don't give much hint of user community or progress.
>
> The generic tests hopefully work; if not, it should be a fairly
> simple fixup. And you're free to add fs-specific tests :)
>
> (I'm not sure if we fall back by default to mkfs.$FSTYP and fsck.$FSTYP;
> if so, it might just work)
>
> -Eric
They work fine--JFS currently survives all of generic/* intact--but...
JFS: The syntax for a lot of things is very close to that of ReiserFS,
ext3, and ext4 filesystems. However, before just inserting "jfs" into
the common/rc case switches, test results need to be audited for JFS.
Additionally, I don't know if the current tests use external journals
for non-XFS filesystems: My first attempt stepped all over the XFS
journal creation script, looked messy, and was probably buggy as well.
NILFS2: fsstress/fsx seems to slowly rip NILFS2 to bits, and I have
to come up with a narrower test and report bugs to those guys.
common/rc could be revised to better target filesystems with no
fsck whatsoever, such as NILFS2 and F2FS. I've been getting by with
a simple `ln -s /bin/true /sbin/fsck.nilfs2`, and really, that is the
best long-term solution from an administrative standpoint.
So you see how this might be an easy fix but still take up hours in
debugging...
Thanks again!
Michael
More information about the xfs
mailing list