From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sandeen.net ([63.231.237.45]:57133 "EHLO sandeen.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750925AbbCTS5u (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:57:50 -0400 Received: from liberator.sandeen.net (liberator.sandeen.net [10.0.0.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sandeen.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E53E263C3A21 for ; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:57:49 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <550C6DAD.4060602@sandeen.net> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:57:49 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fstests: Add overlayfs support References: <550C46B2.8060407@sandeen.net> <550C4951.1030804@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <550C4951.1030804@sandeen.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: fstests-owner@vger.kernel.org To: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 3/20/15 11:22 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > If OVERLAYFS=1 is set, then every time we mount the scratch or > test device, set up overlayfs directories under it, and switch > the directory under test to the upper directory. > > This doesn't specifically or directly test overlayfs, it simply > runs the existing tests over it. As such, a few tests fail, > and may be expected to fail due to overlayfs limitations and > caveats. I haven't sorted through the results yet. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen Zach has almost convinced me that this is the wrong approach and/or not worth doing, or at least not merging. Many of the failures are as a result of this being tacked on, and several tests wouldn't be expected to work at all. So I dunno. What do people think; it's at least interesting on the side, to see what falls off. Good news is, no oopses yet! :) -Eric