lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectSuccess! Was: [PATCH 0/4] 2.6.21-rc7 NFS writes: fix a series of issues
    From
    On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 04:49:31PM -0500, Florin Iucha wrote:
    > On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 05:30:42PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
    > > > I'm far from the machine right now, so I will do some more tests
    > > > tonight, but right now, the new patchset is not good. What is the
    > > > difference between reverting the patch you sent yesterday and your
    > > > current fifth patch? I assume the other four are identical, right?
    > >
    > > The only difference is the way in which we handle retries of an NFSv4
    > > request: the new patch disconnects if and only if a timeout has
    > > occurred, or the server sends us garbage.
    >
    > I have to mention that I rebased to the head of the tree
    > (895e1fc7226e6732bc77138955b6c7dfa279f57a) before applying your
    > patches, in order to test what I expect the official tree to be.
    >
    > Tonight I'll test this kernel once more, then go back to 21-rc7 and
    > apply your 5 patches and re-test.

    It passed big-copy, and the copy run from the gnome-session while I
    did my morning light browsing, email reading, etc.

    kernel:
    895e1fc7226e6732bc77138955b6c7dfa279f57a

    patches:
    linux-2.6.21-001-cleanup_unstable_write.dif
    linux-2.6.21-002-defer_clearing_pg_writeback.dif
    linux-2.6.21-003-fix_desynchronised_ncommit.dif
    linux-2.6.21-004-fix_nfs_set_page_dirty.dif
    linux-2.6.21-005-fix_nfsv4_resend.dif

    Regards,
    florin

    --
    Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition.
    http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163
    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-04-20 15:33    [W:0.020 / U:6.888 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site