From: Namjae Jeon Subject: Re: Ext4 test failures -- COLLAPSE_RANGE and ZERO_RANGE Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 23:46:21 +0900 Message-ID: References: <20140403184703.GA2246@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Lukas Czerner , linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: "Theodore Ts'o" Return-path: Received: from mail-qg0-f53.google.com ([209.85.192.53]:35090 "EHLO mail-qg0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753492AbaDDOqV (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:46:21 -0400 Received: by mail-qg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id z60so2182752qgd.12 for ; Fri, 04 Apr 2014 07:46:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140403184703.GA2246@thunk.org> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2014-04-04 3:47 GMT+09:00, Theodore Ts'o : > Hi Lukas, Namjae, > > During final testing, I found two problems. One is that the mount > option dioread_nolock is causing a test failure for ext4/001, which is > a ZERO_RANGE test. > > The other is that the mount option data=journal is cuasing a test > failure for shared/002 and shared/004, which are COLLAPSE_RANGE bugs. > > Since these aren't regressions, and I don't think these new fallocate > modes will probably be widely used at least initially, I don't think > it's worth it to drop these two patches, especialy since we've done > all of our testing for this merge window with the tests present. > However, I'd really appreicate it if you take a look at them. Hi Ted. Sorry about this bug. I will look into collapse range issue with data=journal. And I'll also check more carefully insert range patch with the way you guided. Thanks! >