On 24/04/2018, Omar Sandoval <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 04:21:36PM +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote: >> > Without this fix, I get an IO error in this test: >> > >> > # dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null iflag=direct & \ >> > while killall -SIGUSR1 dd; do sleep 0.1; done & \ >> > echo mem > /sys/power/state ; \ >> > sleep 5; killall dd # stop after 5 seconds >> >> linux-block specifically asked for a test derived from this reproducer. >> They didn't come up with any suggestion for testing the code more >> directly >> (and robustly). So this test uses system suspend, automated with >> pm_test. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alan Jenkins <[email protected]> > > Hi, Alan, thanks for the test. I was able to come up with a > deterministic reproducer which runs in a few seconds, added here: > https://github.com/osandov/blktests/blob/master/tests/block/016. On 24/04/2018, Omar Sandoval <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 04:21:36PM +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote: >> > Without this fix, I get an IO error in this test: >> > >> > # dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null iflag=direct & \ >> > while killall -SIGUSR1 dd; do sleep 0.1; done & \ >> > echo mem > /sys/power/state ; \ >> > sleep 5; killall dd # stop after 5 seconds >> >> linux-block specifically asked for a test derived from this reproducer. >> They didn't come up with any suggestion for testing the code more >> directly >> (and robustly). So this test uses system suspend, automated with >> pm_test. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alan Jenkins <[email protected]> > > Hi, Alan, thanks for the test. I was able to come up with a > deterministic reproducer which runs in a few seconds, added here: > https://github.com/osandov/blktests/blob/master/tests/block/016.
Thanks for the update, you may consider this reviewed. It answers my concern and makes it look so easy. I will console myself that at least I had the right question :-). Regards Alan
