On Wed, Feb 19 2014, Christian Ehrhardt wrote: > As it is usually we needed a few little extensions to support the old use > cases we wanted to migrate to the new benchmark. Also we found a few issues > in the fio code that we had to fix. > > All that happened a long time back and we always wanted to cotribute our > changes to the project which after a loooong legal process now is finally > possible. To make things worse the code was affected by some bit rot due > to that legal waiting time which in turn stalled me making it ready for > submission again. Curious, what was the legal holdup? Fio being a new project to contribute to, or just getting it out in general. If there's anything I can do to make this easier in the future, let me know. > I'm happy that I finally found some time to update the patches to match to > the current fio git. It passed my 18 test cases which are based on the > examples delivered with fio new for the new functionality added. > > Looking forward to your review, > Christian > > The patch series includes: > [patch 1/9] fio: fix job clone mem leak > [patch 2/9] fio: allow general repeatability > [patch 3/9] fio: allow milliseconds on all time specifiers > [patch 4/9] fio: provide an option for a startdelay range > [patch 5/9] fio: add multi directory support > [patch 6/9] fio: allow combined output (default and terse) > [patch 7/9] fio: flush log files on test end > [patch 8/9] fio: fix last block never being touched by random offsets > [patch 9/9] fio: allow 0 as compress percentage Most of these can be applied directly. I need to double check 8/9, but apart from that, all looks like they can be directly applied. They seem to be mangled a bit, however, there's line wrapping going on. Would it be possible to resend with that fixed? -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe fio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
