xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: direct-IO writes strange behavior

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: direct-IO writes strange behavior
From: Alberto Nava <beto@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:14:09 -0800
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3FC78FA4.2090000@kasenna.com>
References: <3FBECF7E.6010509@kasenna.com> <3FBFEF6A.3000609@kasenna.com> <20031127004420.77f31a9c.akpm@osdl.org> <3FC78FA4.2090000@kasenna.com>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
Alberto Nava wrote:


I'll try this again on test9 or test11.

I tried this with the 2.6.0-test11 and it works fine. The 512k
writes to a new file are propagaded all the way to the drives. It
work without having to use '-d unwritten' or preallocation.

Here is a snip of the proc file I used to verify it.

(8,16)@85886 b=f24f0d80 r=ef9c49b0 s=140288(size=524288) prio=0 rw 1
(8,32)@85886 b=ef891680 r=ef9c47b8 s=140288(size=524288) prio=0 rw 1
(8,48)@85895 b=ef891680 r=ef9c49b0 s=140288(size=524288) prio=0 rw 1
(8,64)@85895 b=f24f0d80 r=ef9c47b8 s=140288(size=524288) prio=0 rw 1
(8,80)@85903 b=ef891680 r=ef9c47b8 s=140288(size=524288) prio=0 rw 1


I'll use stock Linus until the direct-io rework is completed/tested.

Thanks a lot for your help
beto



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>