From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id
	o0C9nNdk254121 for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 03:49:23 -0600
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 29B5C12F1E46
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:50:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [18.85.46.34])
	by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id M0CYtxB2u4hLeGur for
	<xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:50:18 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:50:17 -0500
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] xfsqa: add simple xfs_fsr test
Message-ID: <20100112095017.GC20017@infradead.org>
References: <1263271269-18997-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
	<1263271269-18997-5-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1263271269-18997-5-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 03:41:09PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> We have very little fsr test coverage in the test suite right now.
> 042 is the only test that runs it, and it only defragments a single
> file.
> 
> Improve the coverage by simply running xfs_fsr of the test
> filesystem. This gives xfs_fsr a wide variety of inodes to try to
> defragment. A simple test like this would have tripped over the
> attr2 fork offset problems in the swap extents ioctl long ago
> thanks to the varied nature of inodes the test suite leaves around
> in this filesystem.

Looks good,

and having it after 200+ testcases also means it should have at least a
bit of work to do.


Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

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