On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 17:21:39 +0100 Vincent Donnefort <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 09:15:41AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:31:23 +0100 > > Vincent Donnefort <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Looking at the function again, shouldn't we add !rb_is_static(cpu_buffer) > > > as > > > well to the full page test? > > > > Why? > > > > -- Steve > > So that the splice can make progress when the ring-buffer is presistent or > user-mapped. Or do we say that's expected behaviour? > Ah yeah, I see. Hmm, looking at the code to see how this would work, I think I found another bug. Let me look deeper into it. -- Steve
