From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.141]:50506 "EHLO ipmail04.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935153AbcI3AS6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2016 20:18:58 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 10:18:53 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 43/63] xfs: teach get_bmapx about shared extents and the CoW fork Message-ID: <20160930001853.GI27872@dastard> References: <147503120985.30303.14151302091684456858.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <147503149320.30303.9720221974285402096.stgit@birch.djwong.org> <20160929170537.GI4546@infradead.org> <20160929174059.GX14092@birch.djwong.org> <20160929195112.GA26321@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160929195112.GA26321@infradead.org> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:51:12PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:40:59AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > There are a few xfstests that check the contents of the CoW extent fork > > to make sure it's working properly. How about a compromise -- leave the > > flag in, but return -EINVAL unless CONFIG_XFS_DEBUG=y ? > > Personally I'd prefer to remove it. Maybe we'll need Dave as a tie > breaker? Well, I kinda see it like reporting delalloc extents - they are in-memory, but we can report them to userspace even though they will change shortly. I don't think it's generally useful, but right now we need all the validation checks we can get. Ok, Darrick, let's make it debug only right now so those tests work while we get this code all sorted. And then plan to remove it before we remove the EXPERIMENTAL flag from reflink? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com