On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 09:50:19AM +0000, Joe Thornber wrote: > On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 02:25:33AM +0000, Mears, Morgan wrote: > > If one specifies a cblock range in the dm-cache invalidate_cblocks message > > (commit 65790ff919e2e07ccb4457415c11075b245d643b), the final cblock in the > > range does not get invalidated. For example, after: > > > > dmsetup message cache 0 invalidate_cblocks 10-11 > > > > cblock 11 will still be in the cache. The reason is the (begin != end) > > check in process_invalidation_request() (dm-cache-target.c); were it to > > change to (begin <= end), the final block would be treated like the rest. > > > > However, parse_cblock_range() relies on the current behavior for the single > > block case; if the change above were applied, an extra block would be > > invalidated for each single-block invalidation request. > > > > So: is the current behavior intentional? > > Yes. Documented in code, but I think Documentation/device-mapper/cache.txt should also say this. /* * Defines a range of cblocks, begin to (end - 1) are in the range. end is * the one-past-the-end value. */ See https://github.com/jthornber/device-mapper-test-suite/blob/master/lib/dmtest/tests/cache/invalidate_cblocks_tests.rb for example uses. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
