On Montag, 23. September 2019 16:46:53 CEST Greg Kurz wrote: > > > > > I'll do some > > > > > more manual testing and issue a PR when I'm confident enough. > > > > > > > > That would be highly appreciated! So far I am the only one ever having > > > > tested this patch set at all! > > > > > > Just to clarify, I won't thoroughly test it. My main concern is that it > > > doesn't break things. > > > > So in other words you are only going to test the default behaviour > > --multidevs=warn? > > This I've already done, along with multidevs=forbid. > > Now I plan to run the PJD test suite from Tuxera with a simple > cross-device setup and --multidevs=remap. And that's it.
Well, Ok then, however at least some simple, manual, final "ls -i" of the inode numbers on guest would not hurt though. ;-) > > If yes, and since that would mean I was the only person ever having tested > > the actual fix, shouldn't --multidevs=remap|forbid better be marked as > > experimental (docs and runtime warning) for now? Maybe that would also > > anticipate receiving feedback from people actually using it later on. > Makes sense. I don't think it is worth having a runtime warning, > but I'll turn remap to x-remap and amend the docs. Mwa, I would like to veto against your "x-remap" plan though. Keep in mind I also have to send out a patch for libvirt for this fix. Even I would not have read "x" to stand for "experimental". So I would definitely favor a runtime warning instead of renaming that parameter. I can send a patch on top for docs and warning if you want.
