| To: | Mike Gao <ygao.linux@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: What should to do with ASSERT failed |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:32:08 -0500 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <AANLkTinXDQoo7ZU+w2V7N7zBrxdS=Tc71MNZ7M4R5A9w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <AANLkTin-zf0chkk68pGfwDRt03QaKmNdsP3=goDEUS+p@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4C7C26E8.9070308@xxxxxxxxxxx> <AANLkTinXDQoo7ZU+w2V7N7zBrxdS=Tc71MNZ7M4R5A9w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228) |
Mike Gao wrote: > Thanks very much for help. The kernel is pretty old, 2.6.19 but the xfs > is pretty new. > the block size is 512 and use mmap for test with write and read compare. > (xfstest 074). > > If I ignored this ASSERT(comment out), the test will failed. I guess > because some pages never written to disk. > FWIW, in your case, if you are not expecting to do IO like test 194 then maybe you'd be better off w/o this patch if it's causing problems in more normal IO patterns ... -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: What should to do with ASSERT failed, Eric Sandeen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: What should to do with ASSERT failed, Dave Chinner |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: What should to do with ASSERT failed, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: What should to do with ASSERT failed, Dave Chinner |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |