| Message ID | 20191111074010.3738-1-amir73il@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | overlay: support timestamp range check | expand |
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 11:40 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote: > > Overlayfs timestamp range is the same as base fs timestamp range > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> > --- > > Eryu, > > This change will cause the test to start running and failing on upstream > kernel with overlayfs over some fs (e.g. xfs/ext4). > > The kernel fix is posted: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20191111073000.2957-1-amir73il@gmail.com/T/#u The patch seems ok to me. Acked-by: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc index b988e912..e5535279 100644 --- a/common/rc +++ b/common/rc @@ -1978,13 +1978,14 @@ _require_timestamp_range() _filesystem_timestamp_range() { local device=${1:-$TEST_DEV} + local fstyp=${2:-$FSTYP} u32max=$(((1<<32)-1)) s32min=-$((1<<31)) s32max=$(((1<<31)-1)) s64max=$(((1<<63)-1)) s64min=$((1<<63)) - case $FSTYP in + case $fstyp in ext2) echo "$s32min $s32max" ;; @@ -2005,6 +2006,13 @@ _filesystem_timestamp_range() btrfs) echo "$s64min $s64max" ;; + overlay) + if [ ! -z $OVL_BASE_FSTYP -a $OVL_BASE_FSTYP != "overlay" ]; then + _filesystem_timestamp_range $OVL_BASE_TEST_DEV $OVL_BASE_FSTYP + else + echo "-1 -1" + fi + ;; *) echo "-1 -1" ;;
Overlayfs timestamp range is the same as base fs timestamp range Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> --- Eryu, This change will cause the test to start running and failing on upstream kernel with overlayfs over some fs (e.g. xfs/ext4). The kernel fix is posted: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20191111073000.2957-1-amir73il@gmail.com/T/#u Thanks, Amir. common/rc | 10 +++++++++- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)