From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.131]:33163 "EHLO ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752444AbaBBV5X (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Feb 2014 16:57:23 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 08:57:20 +1100 From: Dave Chinner To: Filipe David Borba Manana Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, jbacik@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: more tests for test case btrfs/030 Message-ID: <20140202215720.GT2212@dastard> References: <1391220332-22118-1-git-send-email-fdmanana@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1391220332-22118-1-git-send-email-fdmanana@gmail.com> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Feb 01, 2014 at 02:05:32AM +0000, Filipe David Borba Manana wrote: > This change adds some new tests for btrfs' incremental send feature. > These are all related with inverting the parent-child relationship > of directories, and cover the cases: > > * when the new parent didn't get renamed (just moved) > * when a child file of the former parent gets renamed too > > These new cases are fixed by the following btrfs linux kernel patches: > > * "Btrfs: more send support for parent/child dir relationship inversion" > * "Btrfs: fix send dealing with file renames and directory moves" > > Signed-off-by: Filipe David Borba Manana Rather than modifying 030 which will cause it to fail on kernels where it previously passed, can you factor out the common code and create a new test with the additional coverage? i.e. the rule of thumb is that once a test is "done" we don't go back and modify it in significant ways - we write a new unit test that covers the new/extended functionality. Redundancy in unit tests is not a bad thing... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com