On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 03:18:03PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 08:58:25AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 01:10:54AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > > + # This is not true for tmpfs. > > > > Er... is this file size change a bug? > > There is no filesize bug, the comment about tmpfs always ensuring seeing > the actual data since, well, there its kind of write-through. Since we > share the same filemap_map_pages() I'd expect the rest should behave the > same with tmpfs, but since I didn't test that the test skips it for now. > > We'll test it, with all the patch "filemap: cap PTE range to be > created to allowed zero fill in folio_map_range()" on tmpfs, and see if > we can just enable this test there too. Might as well as we're driving > by and sprinkling large folios there too. Turns out our patch "filemap: cap PTE range to be created to allowed zero fill in folio_map_range()" ends up fixing this on tmpfs for huge pages. So consider this now tested on tmpfs as well, I'll adjust the test for that. Luis
