xfstests: only run 197 on 32-bit machines
PATCH 1/1 xfstests: only run 197 on 32-bit machines
Don't run test 197 on 64-bit machines
If it always passes on 64 bits, this gives a false sense of security. Make it obvious.
--
197 +4 -0
@@ -37,6 +37,10 @@ trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15 _supported_fs xfs _supported_os Linux +bitsperlong=`src/feature -w` +if [ "$bitsperlong" -ne 32 ]; then + _notrun "This test is only valid on 32 bit machines" +fi mkdir $TEST_DIR/ttt for n in {1..168}; do
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Quoted 4 lines · Eric Sandeen
Don't run test 197 on 64-bit machines
If it always passes on 64 bits, this gives a false sense of security. Make it obvious.
Sounds reasonable.
Quoted 2 lines
Signed-off-by Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>
Quoted 19 lines
--
197 +4
-0@@ -37,6 +37,10 @@ trap "_cleanup; exit \$status" 0 1 2 3 15 _supported_fs xfs _supported_os Linux +bitsperlong=`src/feature -w` +if [ "$bitsperlong" -ne 32 ]; then + _notrun "This test is only valid on 32 bit machines" +fi mkdir $TEST_DIR/ttt for n in {1..168}; do
Quoted 4 lines
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Quoted 4 lines · Eric Sandeen
Don't run test 197 on 64-bit machines
If it always passes on 64 bits, this gives a false sense of security. Make it obvious.
I don't think it matters, but your patch looks correct and if it helps you in some way..
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
Quoted 12 lines · Christoph Hellwig
Quoted 4 lines · Eric Sandeen
Don't run test 197 on 64-bit machines
If it always passes on 64 bits, this gives a false sense of security. Make it obvious.
I don't think it matters, but your patch looks correct and if it helps you in some way..
Reviewed-by Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
thanks
I only wanted to put it in because I was looking at fedora, wanted to test it against this bug, ran it, it passed, and *then* I remembered that it'd only fail on 32-bit, and my test (on that hardware) wasn't really valid.
-Eric
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs