> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 01:52:28PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote: > > > > > > What's the status of the "[2/3] ext4: fix ZERO_RANGE test failure in > > > data journalling mode" patch. Is it no longer needed? > > It is needed. Currently, I am considering your suggestion of introducing > > EXT4_I(inode)->i_write_mutex which can also include ext4_aio_mutex. > > OK; I've already pushed a set of patches to Linus because it's getting > fairly late in the development cycle, and we really want to get as > much of the bug fixes into -rc3 (having missed -rc2 by a few hours, > sigh). Okay, I will try to fix remaning issues in -rc3. > > By the way, in doing some final testing, it appears that we are still > failing generic/127 with a 1k blocksize. If I block COLLAPSE_RANGE > using the patch that everyone but me seems to hate :-), the problem > goes away. So we have at least one other issue that needs to be > looked at. > > You can reproduce by grabbing the dev branch from the ext4.git tree, > and then cherry-picking the top commit from the unstable branch. > > Then run "kvm-xfstests -c 1k generic/127", with and without the > following in config.custom: > > EXTRA_ARG="ext4.fallocate_mode_block=0x08" Okay, I will look at this issue now. Thanks Ted!! > > Cheers, > > - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
