public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [xfstests PATCH 0/4] locktest: cleanup, bugfixes, and add new locking test
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 08:58:45 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140512225845.GN26353@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1399907193-23857-1-git-send-email-jlayton@poochiereds.net>

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:06:29AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote:
> This patchset does some general cleanup of the locktest binary, adds
> some infrastructure to allow testing F_GETLK requests, and adds a new
> F_GETLK test to the pile.
> 
> The main impetus here is a regression that I caused in F_GETLK handling
> for v3.15. The patch is making its way to Linus now, but I want to be
> sure that it doesn't regress in the future.

So do these changes cause locktest to fail on older kernels? i.e.
does changing the test cause the locktest tests to fail where
previously they passed? If so, we're going to have to make this a
little more complex...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com

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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-05-12 22:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-05-12 15:06 [xfstests PATCH 0/4] locktest: cleanup, bugfixes, and add new locking test Jeff Layton
2014-05-12 15:06 ` [xfstests PATCH 1/4] locktest: don't assume that F_OPEN should use O_RDWR Jeff Layton
2014-05-12 15:06 ` [xfstests PATCH 2/4] locktest: set f_fd to INVALID_HANDLE on close Jeff Layton
2014-05-12 15:06 ` [xfstests PATCH 3/4] locktest: consolidate do_lock and do_unlock, and add ability to F_GETLK Jeff Layton
2014-05-12 15:06 ` [xfstests PATCH 4/4] locktest: add a F_GETLK vs. openmode test Jeff Layton
2014-05-12 22:58 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2014-05-13  0:35   ` [xfstests PATCH 0/4] locktest: cleanup, bugfixes, and add new locking test Jeff Layton
2014-05-13  0:54     ` Dave Chinner
2014-05-13  1:00     ` Dave Chinner
2014-05-13  1:13       ` Jeff Layton

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=20140512225845.GN26353@dastard \
    --to=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jlayton@poochiereds.net \
    --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