On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:32:26PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > On 11/23/16 12:21, Omar Sandoval wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:21:41PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Can anyone help me on how to get test coverage for the compression > > > > > code? > > > > > > > > I'm not surprised xfstests missed this one since it's just readahead. > > > > You might be able to get better coverage with > > > > > > > > export MOUNT_OPTS="-o compress-force" > > > > > > And where the data is /dev/urandom the btrfs compression will > > > bail out, so xfstest cases which uses /dev/urandom won't test > > > the compression code. > > > > Isn't that just with "-o compress"? That's why I recommended "-o > > compress-force". > > Nope. compress-force doesn't enforce compress even if the data > isn't compressible. I am not sure if its a bug, but its been > like that. > > The difference between compress and compress-force is that > compress-force will never give up and compress will give up > compress by setting nocompress flag if the first extent is > not compressible. > > Thanks, Anand Huh, you're right. The wording in man 5 btrfs could use some clarification. -- Omar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
