On Sun 08-01-17 20:17:10, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> The code currently uses sdio->blkbits to compute the number of blocks to
> be cleaned. However sdio->blkbits is derived from the logical block size
> of the underlying block device (Refer to the definition of
> do_blockdev_direct_IO()). Due to thi
Chandan Rajendra writes:
> The code currently uses sdio->blkbits to compute the number of blocks to
> be cleaned. However sdio->blkbits is derived from the logical block size
> of the underlying block device (Refer to the definition of
> do_blockdev_direct_IO()). Due to this, generic/299 test wou
On 01/08/2017 07:47 AM, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> The code currently uses sdio->blkbits to compute the number of blocks to
> be cleaned. However sdio->blkbits is derived from the logical block size
> of the underlying block device (Refer to the definition of
> do_blockdev_direct_IO()). Due to this,
On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 08:17:10PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote:
> The code currently uses sdio->blkbits to compute the number of blocks to
> be cleaned. However sdio->blkbits is derived from the logical block size
> of the underlying block device (Refer to the definition of
> do_blockdev_direct_I
The code currently uses sdio->blkbits to compute the number of blocks to
be cleaned. However sdio->blkbits is derived from the logical block size
of the underlying block device (Refer to the definition of
do_blockdev_direct_IO()). Due to this, generic/299 test would rarely
fail when executed on an
