From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 o9MBlfqU173921 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2010 06:47:41 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 07:48:55 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: xfstests: use a common _filter_scratch function Message-ID: <20101022114855.GA13867@infradead.org> References: <201010211900.o9LJ086G002762@stout.americas.sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201010211900.o9LJ086G002762@stout.americas.sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Alex Elder Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 02:00:08PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > There are a number of tests that use a shell function called > "filter_scratch" or "_filter_scratch" in order to have the actual > scratch device or mount point show up in test output with a symbolic > name. There are two sets, each following a slightly different > convention. Put a common _filter_scratch function definition in > "common.filter" and have all test scripts use that instead. > Choosing one of the two conventions meant that a few test output > files had to be changed. > > In addition, add a call to _filter_scratch to test 185, and update > its output accordingly. Looks good. It might be worth to add a TEST_DIR filter for completeness as well. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs