On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:14:24AM -0800, Kent Overstreet wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 11:47:04AM -0500, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 09 2013 at 11:12am -0500, > > Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > (take3 with feeling.. I reverted to the gmail's old compose so all > > > should be right in my plain-text gmail world... apologies to Kent and > > > dm-devel for the redundant messages) > > > > > > Hey Kent, > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Kent Overstreet <koverstreet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I've (finally!) got a bcache branch hacked up that ought to be suitable > > > > to go upstream, possibly in staging initially. > > > > > > > > It's currently closer to the dev branch than the stable branch, plus > > > > some additional minor changes to make it all more self contained. The > > > > code has seen a decent amount of testing and I think it's in good shape, > > > > but I'd like it if it could see a bit more testing before I see about > > > > pushing it upstream. > > > > > > > > If anyone wants to try it out, checkout the bcache-for-staging branch. > > > > It's against Linux 3.7. > > > > > > I pulled your 'bcache-for-staging' code into a 'dm-devel-cache-bcache' > > > branch on my github: > > > https://github.com/snitm/linux > > > > > > Purpose is to have a single kernel to compare dm-cache and bcache. My > > > branch is against 3.8-rc2. While importing your code I needed the > > > following change to get bcache to compile: > > > https://github.com/snitm/linux/commit/400b1257e93975864fd6c4b827537a0234551253 > > > > > > It now builds without issue but I haven't tested the resulting bcache > > > > Just tried to use bcache at it locked up: > > Interesting, this is a new bug... > > The main bcache branch is also on top of 3.7, and it doesn't have this > new allocation code and should be fine if you want to try that (there > were also a few bugs I fixed in the master branch without updating the > staging branch, but this looks like something new). > > Gonna try and reproduce this, after I fix that sysfs code. Hrm. Fyi, this is fixed (missed it because my test scripts were using cache replacement policy = random, to better stress other stuff. Doh.) -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
