[PATCH for xfstests] xfstests: fix to make tests/btrfs/013 really work

[Wang Shilong]

Hi Zhang,

On 02/24/2014 06:51 PM, ZhangZhen wrote:
> The test 013 couldn't work because here lacked "start".
> This patch fix it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Zhen<zhenzhang.zhang at huawei.com>
> ---
>   tests/btrfs/013 | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tests/btrfs/013 b/tests/btrfs/013
> index 7620fcc..fb81663 100644
> --- a/tests/btrfs/013
> +++ b/tests/btrfs/013
> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ _check_csum_error()
>   }
>   $XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "falloc 0 1M" -c "pwrite 16k 8k" -c "fsync" \
>   	$SCRATCH_MNT/foo > $seqres.full 2>&1
> -$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG filesystem balance $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seqres.full 2>&1 || \
> +$BTRFS_UTIL_PROG filesystem balance start $SCRATCH_MNT >> $seqres.full 2>&1 || \
>   	_fail "balance failed"
Due to historical reasons, we have 'btrfs file balance <>'.. Until now, 
it is also
ok to run 'btrfs file balance <mnt>', and it has equal effect as 'btrfs 
filesystem balance start'.

Anyway, using latest 'btrfs file balance start <mnt>' is better than 
previous codes..but patch's
title is not right any more...

BTW,Dave Chinner previously pointed out that we need a cleanup, url can 
be seen:

http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-02/msg00482.html

Thanks,
Wang
>   _scratch_unmount
>   _scratch_mount