From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DCC7F3F for ; Mon, 12 May 2014 17:58:55 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC22D8F818B for ; Mon, 12 May 2014 15:58:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net [150.101.137.143]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id KG1KhuJddlul02sr for ; Mon, 12 May 2014 15:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 08:58:45 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [xfstests PATCH 0/4] locktest: cleanup, bugfixes, and add new locking test Message-ID: <20140512225845.GN26353@dastard> References: <1399907193-23857-1-git-send-email-jlayton@poochiereds.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1399907193-23857-1-git-send-email-jlayton@poochiereds.net> 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: Jeff Layton Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com 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