From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FE4E7F3F for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:07:16 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:07:12 -0500 From: Ben Myers Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: make the scratch device for generic/256 slightly larger Message-ID: <20130724230712.GV3111@sgi.com> References: <1372792638-23957-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fusionio.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1372792638-23957-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fusionio.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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Josef Bacik Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 03:17:18PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: > This is similar to a previous fix I sent. 1 gig makes us do mixed file block > groups for btrfs, so these enospc tests will usually fail because we don't have > space for metadata, which is the case for this test. So jack the size up to > 1.5gig so that btrfs can do its normal thing and pass the test. Thanks, > > Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik Looks fine to me. Reviewed-by: Ben Myers _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs