User Details
- User Since
- May 9 2014, 11:04 PM (519 w, 5 d)
Yesterday
Tue, Apr 23
- Respond to markj's feedback.
Mon, Apr 22
Sun, Apr 21
Sat, Apr 13
Wed, Apr 10
Thu, Apr 4
- Skip the fuse_vnop_do_lseek and fuse_filehandle_close if
- Two more fixes:
Wed, Apr 3
Actually, another problem is that EACCES, EINTEGRITY, and EIO errors won't be correctly reported. That problem predates this review, but I'll fix it now.
Looks ok to me, but it's been a long time since I've been active in this code. And it's nice that the patch is so much simpler now!
Tue, Mar 26
Mar 24 2024
Mar 22 2024
Mar 12 2024
An exp-run is what you suggested when I first raised the issue on freebsd-hackers last September. However, I don't know how to do an exp-run. Are you volunteering?
Mar 7 2024
Mar 5 2024
Feb 23 2024
Feb 12 2024
Feb 9 2024
Feb 8 2024
This looks good. BTW, you don't have to wait until the cleanup phase to print the seed. It's OK to print it at the beginning of the test phase. In the event of a failure, Kyua will report everything that the test printed.
Feb 7 2024
This looks good. But I have a few thoughts:
Feb 6 2024
So in the future it will be possible to send a single record with multiple send syscalls? In that case we can certainly remove these tests. However, in the future it will be important to ensure that we can send messages larger than the socket buffer size, right? In that case, I think we should leave these tests here for now, and update them atomically when the new behavior is committed. That way we won't forget.
Feb 4 2024
@imp here's a test case that depends on Rust. Not exactly what you meant, perhaps, but I think it would be a valuable addition. If you like this, we can add versions for other builtin file systems, too.
Feb 3 2024
@emaste what about something like this?
#define VA_NOTIME(ts) { \ ts->tv_sec = -1; \ ts->tv_nsec = 0; \ }
Feb 2 2024
Jan 25 2024
Jan 20 2024
Jan 19 2024
Jan 17 2024
- Replaces memsets by default initializers. Delete allocations using
Jan 16 2024
Jan 15 2024
- Use vnode_pager_clean_sync
Jan 13 2024
Will an operation with LIO_FOFFSET update the current file offset? What happens if two or more operations both specify LIO_FOFFSET? lio_listio does not specify the order in which the operations will be evaluated. Given that, this flag can't be used if two or more operations affect the same file. And IMHO lio_listio isn't very useful with such a restriction.
Jan 11 2024
Jan 9 2024
It LGTM, but let's get some outside review, too. @des what do you think?