Zach Brown <zab@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> No, I didn't see that bug until after I'd fixed the other three, but as >> far as I can tell everything's fixed with the patches I'm about to mail >> out - my test VM has been running for the past two days without errors, >> it's kill -9'ing a process that's got iocbs in flight to a loopback >> device every two seconds. > > I'm really worried that this patch series hasn't seen significant enough > testing to justify being queued. > > I'll be first in line for blame for not finding the time to finish my > review of the series. > > What specific tests has this gone through? The aio tests in xfstests / > ltp? (And as you discovered while chasing this bug, whatever platform > you were running on doesn't seem slow enough to catch some paths.. run > all the tests over loop?) > > Jeff, can you suggest a more modern testing regime for the aio core? > It's been so long since I had to hammer on this stuff.. Modern? No. ;-) I usually use xfstests (all of them, not just the aio group), the libaio test harness, and then hand it off to our performance team to stress the code under benchmarking workloads. Oh, and usually targeted testing for the thing that I'm working on. I'll put a couple of kernels together to hand off to our performance team, though I don't know how much time they have at present. Cheers, Jeff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
