On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:57:22AM -0500, bpm@xxxxxxx wrote: > Wish I did. The test case that discovered this only applies to CXFS. I > would have liked to post a test case for XFS but decided that this has > been on my TODO list for too long already. Looks to me like it has to > be related to the inode size, so you quit probing buffers after the > first. Maybe some discussion will ring some bells for somebody. It would be really good to have one, but the actual patch looks good enough that I'd consider putting it in. I can assumes you ran xfstests with various small blocksize options for both the test and scratch device and it didn't show any regressions? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
