Re: [PATCH] fstests: generic/260: don't fail for certain fstrim ops on btrfs

[David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>]

On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 11:19:50PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 05:08:10PM -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > We have always failed generic/260, because it tests to see if the file
> > system will reject a trim range that is above the reported fs size.
> > However for btrfs we will happily remap logical byte offsets within the
> > file system, so you can end up with bye offsets past the end of the
> > reported end of the file system.  Thus we do not fail these weird
> > ranges.  We also don't have the concept of allocation groups, so the
> > other test that tries to catch overflow doesn't apply to us either.  Fix
> > this by simply using an offset that will fail (once a related kernel
> > path is applied) for btrfs.  This will allow us to test the different
> > overflow cases that do apply to btrfs, and not muddy up test results by
> > giving us a false negative for the cases that do not apply to btrfs.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
> 
> I'd like an ACK from btrfs folks as well.

Ack.