From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64067 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756686AbdCUPzO (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:55:14 -0400 Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 23:55:12 +0800 From: Eryu Guan Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: xfs/191 update Message-ID: <20170321155512.GZ14226@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> References: <20170315163347.29743-1-jtulak@redhat.com> <20170316074941.GS14226@eguan.usersys.redhat.com> <20170321152253.GB59313@bfoster.bfoster> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20170321152253.GB59313@bfoster.bfoster> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Brian Foster Cc: Jan Tulak , fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:22:54AM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:49:41PM +0800, Eryu Guan wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 05:33:47PM +0100, Jan Tulak wrote: > > > The removed 'do_mkfs_pass -l size=4096b' was against man page > > > (-b section). Other entries are things that weren't covered before. > > > > > > Specifically, a standalone "-l size=4096b" should fail, because: > > > To specify any options on the command line in units of filesys‐ > > > tem blocks, this option must be specified first so that the > > > filesystem block size is applied consistently to all options. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jan Tulak > > > > This looks fine to me. But I'd like some reviews from xfs developers > > too. (cc'd linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org). > > > > So has mkfs been fixed to cause '-l size=4096b' to fail? I'm not sure we > should cause the test to fail until/unless the mkfs behavior is fixed > up. I agreed, we don't want to update existing test and introduce false regressions. This is one of the reasons I want more reviews on this patch :) Thanks, Eryu