On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:13:15AM -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> Josef Sipek wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 12, 2007 at 11:28:21AM -0500, Shaya Potter wrote:
> >>Here's my optimization patch (quick and dirty, looks bigger than it is,
> >>most of it is changing indenting of already existing code within if()
> >>statements I added) w/ postmark numbers. I'm a little confused as now
> >>unionfs on backing store is faster than plain backing store (albiet not
> >>many test iterations and my methodology might be suspect, any thoughts?)
> >
> >Hrm, I just tried to run the regression suite on the patched code (which
> >got
> >commited last night) and it failed on create.sh. I am looking into it now.
>
> the bug is (I beleive, haven't tested it yet) that I did bstart != bend
> based on dentry
The symptom is that we are not removing whiteouts on create. The first test
case of create.sh leaves 2 whiteouts behind:
/n/lower/b0/d1/.wh.x
/n/lower/b2/d1/d2/d3/d4/.wh.d
> except that dentry in this case is the entry we want to create.
That dentry should still have the right b{start,end,opaque}, as someone
looked it up, no?
Jeff.
--
If I have trouble installing Linux, something is wrong. Very wrong.
- Linus Torvalds
_______________________________________________
unionfs mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/mailman/listinfo/unionfs
