Hi Ashish,
On 08/31/2016 07:17 AM, Ashish Samant wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> I am able to reproduce this on 4.8.0-rc3 as well. Can you try again and issue
> a sync
> between fallocate and dd?
It works!
ocfs2dev2 is not patched:
ocfs2dev2:/mnt/ocfs2 # reflink -f 10MBfile reflnktes
Hi Eric,
I am able to reproduce this on 4.8.0-rc3 as well. Can you try again and
issue a sync between fallocate and dd?
On 08/30/2016 12:38 AM, Eric Ren wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm on 4.8.0-rc3 kernel. Hope someone else can double-confirm this;-)
>
> On 08/30/2016 12:11 PM, Ashish Samant wrote:
>> Hmm,
Hi,
I'm on 4.8.0-rc3 kernel. Hope someone else can double-confirm this;-)
On 08/30/2016 12:11 PM, Ashish Samant wrote:
> Hmm, thats weird. I see this on 4.7 kernel without the patch:
>
> # xfs_io -c 'pwrite -b 4k 0 10M' -f 10MBfile
> wrote 10485760/10485760 bytes at offset 0
> 10 MiB, 2560 ops; 0
Hmm, thats weird. I see this on 4.7 kernel without the patch:
# xfs_io -c 'pwrite -b 4k 0 10M' -f 10MBfile
wrote 10485760/10485760 bytes at offset 0
10 MiB, 2560 ops; 0. sec (683.995 MiB/sec and 175102.5992 ops/sec)
# reflink -f 10MBfile reflnktest
# fallocate -p -o 0 -l 1048615 reflnktest
# d
Hello,
On 08/30/2016 03:23 AM, Ashish Samant wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> The easiest way to reproduce this is :
>
> 1. Create a random file of say 10 MB
> xfs_io -c 'pwrite -b 4k 0 10M' -f 10MBfile
> 2. Reflink it
> reflink -f 10MBfile reflnktest
> 3. Punch a hole at starting at cluster boundar
On 08/30/2016 03:23 AM, Ashish Samant wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> The easiest way to reproduce this is :
>
> 1. Create a random file of say 10 MB
> xfs_io -c 'pwrite -b 4k 0 10M' -f 10MBfile
> 2. Reflink it
> reflink -f 10MBfile reflnktest
> 3. Punch a hole at starting at cluster boundary w
Hi Eric,
The easiest way to reproduce this is :
1. Create a random file of say 10 MB
xfs_io -c 'pwrite -b 4k 0 10M' -f 10MBfile
2. Reflink it
reflink -f 10MBfile reflnktest
3. Punch a hole at starting at cluster boundary with range greater that
1MB. You can also use a range that will
Hi,
Thanks for this fix. I'd like to reproduce this issue locally and test this
patch,
could you elaborate the detailed steps of reproduction?
Thanks,
Eric
On 08/27/2016 07:04 AM, Ashish Samant wrote:
> If we punch a hole on a reflink such that following conditions are met:
>
> 1. start offset
If we punch a hole on a reflink such that following conditions are met:
1. start offset is on a cluster boundary
2. end offset is not on a cluster boundary
3. (end offset is somewhere in another extent) or
(hole range > MAX_CONTIG_BYTES(1MB)),
we dont COW the first cluster starting at the star
