Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201027174945.GC1644@fieldses.org> <CAFX2Jf=-Y905+cMtLike2ddpthCV=K6CM8iS4EPeAz1RYzF-pA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201105205205.GC25512@fieldses.org>
In-Reply-To: <20201105205205.GC25512@fieldses.org>
From:   Anna Schumaker <schumakeranna@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Nov 2020 16:10:19 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFX2JfkyD6WZptqtoirj=1j3mH8m9Uzx4XKZo2OxzQ5g+qN+xA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: xfstests generic/263
To:     "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc:     Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 3:52 PM J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 03:59:56PM -0400, Anna Schumaker wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 1:49 PM J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Generic/263 is failing whenever client and server both supports
> > > READ_PLUS.
> > >
> > > I'm not even sure the failure is wrong.  The NFS FALLOC operation doesn't
> > > support those other other fallocate modes, are they implemented elsewhere in
> > > the kernel or libc somehow?  Anyway, odd that it would have anything to do with
> > > READ_PLUS.
> >
> > I just ran xfstests, and I'm seeing this too. The test passes using
> > basic READ on v4.2, so there might be something farther down the log
> > that diff is cutting off. I'll see if anything sticks out to me this
> > week.
>
> I think 091 is failing from the same cause, by the way.  I haven't
> investigated any more though.

These tests do a combination of directio reads and buffered reads. I
don't yet understand why this is a problem with READ_PLUS but works
fine for READ

Anna
>
> --b.