All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
To: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, xfstests <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
	<linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the removed _require_nobigloopfs
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 08:43:24 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5150547C.60606@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <514AA503.4060101@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1092 bytes --]

On 03/21/2013 01:13 AM, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
> _require_nobigloopfs has been removed.
> We should use _require_no_large_scratch_dev in the test script.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
> ---
>   276 |    3 +--
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/276 b/276
> index 40b30cf..87363ca 100755
> --- a/276
> +++ b/276
> @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ _need_to_be_root
>   _supported_fs btrfs
>   _supported_os Linux
>   _require_scratch
> -
> -_require_nobigloopfs
> +_require_no_large_scratch_dev
>   _require_btrfs inspect-internal
>   _require_command "/usr/sbin/filefrag"
>

Thanks for the patch.

Not sure what is wrong with your patch (trailing space maybe),
but it could not be imported using git quiltimport.

The patch itself makes sense so I have committed the attached:

Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>

commit 07c1f8d7bae36f2c28ffee6f09c318b1142b6f90
Author: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Mar 21 06:13:23 2013 +0000

     xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the 
removed _require_nobigloopfs

[-- Attachment #2: p276.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1117 bytes --]

>From patchwork Thu Mar 21 06:13:23 2013
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the
 removed _require_nobigloopfs
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 06:13:23 -0000
From: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
X-Patchwork-Id: 5083
Message-Id: <514AA503.4060101@gmail.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, xfstests <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
 linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org

_require_nobigloopfs has been removed.
We should use _require_no_large_scratch_dev in the test script.

Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>

---
 276 |    3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: b/276
===================================================================
--- a/276
+++ b/276
@@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ _need_to_be_root
 _supported_fs btrfs
 _supported_os Linux
 _require_scratch
-
-_require_nobigloopfs
+_require_no_large_scratch_dev
 _require_btrfs inspect-internal
 _require_command "/usr/sbin/filefrag"
 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
To: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, xfstests <xfs@oss.sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the removed _require_nobigloopfs
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 08:43:24 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5150547C.60606@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <514AA503.4060101@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1092 bytes --]

On 03/21/2013 01:13 AM, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
> _require_nobigloopfs has been removed.
> We should use _require_no_large_scratch_dev in the test script.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
> ---
>   276 |    3 +--
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/276 b/276
> index 40b30cf..87363ca 100755
> --- a/276
> +++ b/276
> @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ _need_to_be_root
>   _supported_fs btrfs
>   _supported_os Linux
>   _require_scratch
> -
> -_require_nobigloopfs
> +_require_no_large_scratch_dev
>   _require_btrfs inspect-internal
>   _require_command "/usr/sbin/filefrag"
>

Thanks for the patch.

Not sure what is wrong with your patch (trailing space maybe),
but it could not be imported using git quiltimport.

The patch itself makes sense so I have committed the attached:

Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>

commit 07c1f8d7bae36f2c28ffee6f09c318b1142b6f90
Author: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu Mar 21 06:13:23 2013 +0000

     xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the 
removed _require_nobigloopfs

[-- Attachment #2: p276.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1117 bytes --]

>From patchwork Thu Mar 21 06:13:23 2013
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the
 removed _require_nobigloopfs
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 06:13:23 -0000
From: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
X-Patchwork-Id: 5083
Message-Id: <514AA503.4060101@gmail.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, xfstests <xfs@oss.sgi.com>,
 linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org

_require_nobigloopfs has been removed.
We should use _require_no_large_scratch_dev in the test script.

Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui <shhuiw@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>
Signed-off-by: Rich Johnston <rjohnston@sgi.com>

---
 276 |    3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: b/276
===================================================================
--- a/276
+++ b/276
@@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ _need_to_be_root
 _supported_fs btrfs
 _supported_os Linux
 _require_scratch
-
-_require_nobigloopfs
+_require_no_large_scratch_dev
 _require_btrfs inspect-internal
 _require_command "/usr/sbin/filefrag"
 

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 121 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-03-25 13:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-21  6:13 [PATCH] xfstests 276: use _require_no_large_scratch_dev instead of the removed _require_nobigloopfs Wang Sheng-Hui
2013-03-21  6:13 ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2013-03-25  4:35 ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2013-03-25  4:35   ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2013-03-25  9:19   ` Jan Schmidt
2013-03-25 13:43 ` Rich Johnston [this message]
2013-03-25 13:43   ` Rich Johnston

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5150547C.60606@sgi.com \
    --to=rjohnston@sgi.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shhuiw@gmail.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.