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 46B857F72 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 13:08:54 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <5136428C.3020604@sgi.com> Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2013 13:07:56 -0600 From: Rich Johnston MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: don't assume that falloc_punch implies falloc in test 255 References: <1362506382-26974-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <1362506382-26974-1-git-send-email-tytso@mit.edu> 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" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: Ext4 Developers List , xfs@oss.sgi.com This patch has been committed. Thanks --Rich commit 864688d368d6781c3f6d60bc55b5e3591953e462 Author: Theodore Ts'o Date: Tue Mar 5 17:59:42 2013 +0000 xfstests: don't assume that falloc_punch implies falloc in test 255 As of Linux 3.9-rc1, ext4 will support the punch operation on file systems using indirect blocks, but it can not support the fallocate operation (since there is no way to mark a block as uninitialized using indirect block scheme). This caused test 255 to fail, since it only used _require_xfS_io_falloc_punch assuming that all file systems which supported punch can also support fallocate. Fix this. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs