[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FE03133.6070606@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 09:58:43 +0200
From: justin <jlec@...too.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@...e.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-cachefs@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RESEND] fs: cachefiles: Add support for large files
in filesystem caching
On 19/06/12 09:52, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 10:57:27 +0530 Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@...e.com> wrote:
>
>>> How extensively was this change tested? Please describe the testing
>>> which was performed?
>>>
>>
>> The original patch was tested by mounting a NFS share with fscache
>> option enabled, do a md5sum on a nfs file larger than 2GB and ensure
>> that the file is getting cached by fscache (watch cache size growing)
>> on x86_64.
>
> Well it will need a lot more coverage testing than that. truncate?
> expanding truncate? write, lseek, pwrite, pread(), mmap(MAP_SHARED),
> behavior at the new max file size (what is that?), etc.
>
Hello,
I am using this patch since the 2.6.3* linux, while working with files
>4 Gb on a daily bases. This isn't a testsuite, but it worked fine for
me all the time.
How would such testsuite you request look like? Anybody willing to write it?
Thanks,
Justin
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (303 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists