From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p58InOxd111534 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:49:24 -0500 Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id D0EA949FDC9 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:49:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e37.co.us.ibm.com (e37.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.158]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 2FkAUih8mgXp3eJj for ; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:49:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.107]) by e37.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p58IkNR7001888 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 12:46:23 -0600 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p58In9wY348520 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 12:49:16 -0600 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p58CmxXs000764 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 06:48:59 -0600 Message-ID: <4DEFC41A.9070701@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 11:48:58 -0700 From: Allison Henderson MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Port xfstests 145, 161, 175, 176, 185? List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Ext4 Developers List , linux-fsdevel , xfs-oss Hi all! During one of my reviews for the punch hole tests patch set it was mentioned that it would be helpful to take the xfstests 145, 161, 175, 176, 185 and modify them such that they can run with out requiring the dmapi. These tests contain some more interesting punch hole tests, but they dont normally run unless there is support for dmapi. I did take a peek at them and I was thinking that if we decide to do this, we would probably need to do something like introduce a new set of source code that is similar to what is seen under the dmapi folder, but modified to use a generic interface instead of the dmapi libraries. We could try to merge them into a single code path, but I think that may introduce more complexities than would be desirable. I just wanted to get a general consensus of how many people would be interested in this idea. Thx all! Allison Henderson _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs