From: Filipe David Manana <fdmanana@gmail.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com,
"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: more tests for test case btrfs/030
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 2014 22:08:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAL3q7H7wgDvUWUJdZJSswm+hx==GvyeVMd=sh_yNkCVOTyyypw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140202215720.GT2212@dastard>
On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> wrote:
> 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 <fdmanana@gmail.com>
>
> 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...
Right. The only reason I did this, instead of a new test file, is that
because the former fix which btrfs/030 relates to is not yet in any
kernel release. Given this fact, what do you think?
thanks
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dave.
> --
> Dave Chinner
> david@fromorbit.com
--
Filipe David Manana,
"Reasonable men adapt themselves to the world.
Unreasonable men adapt the world to themselves.
That's why all progress depends on unreasonable men."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-02 22:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-01 2:05 [PATCH] xfstests: more tests for test case btrfs/030 Filipe David Borba Manana
2014-02-02 21:57 ` Dave Chinner
2014-02-02 22:08 ` Filipe David Manana [this message]
2014-02-02 22:25 ` Dave Chinner
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='CAL3q7H7wgDvUWUJdZJSswm+hx==GvyeVMd=sh_yNkCVOTyyypw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=fdmanana@gmail.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=jbacik@fb.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).