Re: 1352 NUL bytes at the end of a page?

[Nick Piggin]

Wayne Scott wrote:
> From: Chris Mason <mason@xxxxxxxx>
>
> > Good to hear.  We probably still need Andrew's truncate fix, this just
> > isn't the right workload to show it.  Andrew, that reiserfs fix survived
> > testing here, could you please include it?
> >
> > -chris
>
>
> BTW. We have had one other person report a similar failure.
>
> http://db.bitkeeper.com/cgi-bin/bugdb.cgi?.page=view&id=2004-05-19-001
>
> But if sounds like this problem is now understood.  It was a pleasure
> to watch you guys, and someone should buy Steven a beer.  Or perhaps
> order a pizza for his family because I suspect this took some of their
> time.

Yep. Thanks for your help Steven.

I don't think anyone has cleared up the performance regression
problem yet though, so I'll have to bug you a bit more.

Steven, with all else being equal, you said you found a 2.6.3 SuSE
kernel to significantly outperform 2.6.6, is that right? If so can
you try the same test with plain 2.6.3 please? We'll go from there.

This one isn't urgent, because I suspect it could be something
specific to the SuSE kernel rather than a regression in Linus' tree
- we've heard no other complaints... so just whenever you get the
chance.

Nick
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/