From: Bruce Guenter Subject: Re: ext4 df regression introduced by commit 9d0be50 Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 14:59:11 -0600 Message-ID: <20100520205911.GA2317@untroubled.org> References: <20100510180531.GA13538@untroubled.org> <20100520161121.GB28963@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20100520163214.GC28770@untroubled.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="UugvWAfsgieZRqgk" To: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from zak.futurequest.net ([69.5.6.152]:44710 "HELO zak.futurequest.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753355Ab0ETU7P (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 May 2010 16:59:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100520163214.GC28770@untroubled.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:32:14AM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote: > IIRC this only affects NFS clients. The same test running locally on > the server doesn't show the same problem. I will retest shortly and > confirm (and also test with 2.6.34). Sorry, I was mistaken. Running 'df' either locally or remotely shows the same results. I have been unable to reproduce the problem with a simplified test program as of yet, and have so far been unable to reproduce the problem with 2.6.34 with any program either. Hopefully this means the problem has been solved, but I'll let you know if it reappears in 2.6.34 --=20 Bruce Guenter http://untroubled.org/ --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkv1op8ACgkQ6W+y3GmZgOhQiACgo++0T/LQERg5M9DKH2pJJM10 xBUAnRH2PgKR/Igvtetk5BqytLti3G4F =ILOS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --UugvWAfsgieZRqgk--