On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 06:43:55PM -0400, Dan Fuhry wrote: > > The patch style looks, I've briefly tested it in fstests and it blows > > very quickly, the stacktraces are unreadable. So I could mismerge it or > > there's another reason. Anyway, I'm going to pick this patch for 4.7 and > > will add it to my for-next after the crashes are resolved. > > Thanks for looking at this. I will test against for-linus-4.6 tomorrow > (unless there's a better branch to build against - I'm a noob here) > and see if I can find anything obvious. > > I've had success with a rudimentary test that evaluates only the two > new rename modes, and does not test behavior when subvolumes are > involved, but have yet to subject it to a larger test suite such as > xfstests. So it wouldn't surprise me if it breaks down there. I'll try > and get that going on my system and see if I can reproduce.
I'm sorry for the confusion, the crashes were caused by overlayfs tests that I mistakenly mixed together with the rename patch. After re-evaluation, generic/024 025 and 078 (the RENAME_*) passes, the rest seems to be ok as well. IOW, the patch is in state to be added to for-next. The fstests should need to be extended to add the cross rename involving subvolumes. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
