On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:31:47PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote:
> Problem was mainly due to the patch 3/4, which tried to access the
> return pointer even for the failed condition. The fix is to bring the
> device point access under the else part as show below [2]. I have
> included this fix in V5. Which is tested with btrfs xfstests.
> Pls could you consider v5 for 4.16 ?
Hm ok, thre's still some time to test it. One more fstests report that
appeared before and also with the v5:
btrfs/007 4s ... [16:38:09] [16:38:12] [failed, exit status 1] - output mismatch (see /root/test/mmtests/work/sources/xfstests-git-installed/results//btrfs/007.out.bad)
--- tests/btrfs/007.out 2017-09-20 14:24:58.334716658 +0200
+++ /root/test/mmtests/work/sources/xfstests-git-installed/results//btrfs/007.out.bad 2018-01-22 16:38:12.883931593 +0100
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
QA output created by 007
*** test send / receive
-*** done
+failed: '/root/test/mmtests/work/sources/xfstests-git-installed/src/fssum -r /tmp/tmp.eZcr17wqNn/incr.fssum /root/test/mmtests/scratch_mnt/incr'
+(see /root/test/mmtests/work/sources/xfstests-git-installed/results//btrfs/007.full for details)
*** unmount
...
(Run 'diff -u tests/btrfs/007.out /root/test/mmtests/work/sources/xfstests-git-installed/results//btrfs/007.out.bad' to see the entire diff)
--
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
