Subrata Modak wrote: > Hi David/Eric, > > XFS saw the following improvements in 2.6.26: > > * Account for inode cluster alignment in all allocations, > * Remove CONFIG_XFS_SECURITY, > > We are in search of functional/regression test cases/suite, which can > help us test the XFS in general and these improvements in particular. > May we know whether you can share the same with LTP under GPLv2, if you > have something with you. > > Regards-- > Subrata
For the removal of CONFIG_XFS_SECURITY, there's not much to test. It just means that the security namespace (used by example for selinux) is always available rather than being configurable. It was removed because the configuration really didn't gain anything; no code was dropped when it was turned off. I suppose that if you wanted, you could test that the security namespace is always writeable via setfattr: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# setfattr -n security.foo -v bar /tmp/blah [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# getfattr -d -m - /tmp/blah getfattr: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names # file: tmp/blah security.foo="bar" -Eric ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
