From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p6S8lwNo247570 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 03:47:59 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 6B3A19E6A9 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (173-166-109-252-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.109.252]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id fBTgiOy1Klw5qqdp for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:47:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 04:47:56 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfstests: Add support for btrfs in 015 Message-ID: <20110728084756.GC3407@infradead.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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: Stefan Behrens Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:28:00AM +0200, Stefan Behrens wrote: > Added btrfs to the list of supported filesystems for test 015, and > increased free space reporting tolerance to 10% for btrfs. > Replaced the call to _scratch_mkfs_xfs with the XFS specific size > parameter by the generic one for sized filesystem creation which is > _scratch_mkfs_sized. ACK for the _scratch_mkfs_sized changed, but I'm really curious why we would allow so much more tolerance for btrfs. And again, why can't these be marked generic? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs