On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote:
>> Sage,
>>
>> Great. Is there some automated testing system that looks for
>> regressions in cephfs that I can be watching for?
>
> Yep, you can join the ceph...@ceph.com email list and watch for the
> kce
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote:
> Sage,
>
> Great. Is there some automated testing system that looks for
> regressions in cephfs that I can be watching for?
Yep, you can join the ceph...@ceph.com email list and watch for the
kcephfs suite results (see http://ceph.com/resources/mailing-l
Sage,
Great. Is there some automated testing system that looks for
regressions in cephfs that I can be watching for?
- Milosz
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> Hi Milosz,
>
> I pulled both these into the testing branch. Thanks!
>
> sage
>
> On Fri, 9 Aug 2013, Milosz Tanski wr
Hi Milosz,
I pulled both these into the testing branch. Thanks!
sage
On Fri, 9 Aug 2013, Milosz Tanski wrote:
> Currently ceph_invalidatepage has is overly eger with it's checks which are
> moot. The second change cleans up the case where offset is non zero.
>
> Please pull the from:
> http
Currently ceph_invalidatepage has is overly eger with it's checks which are
moot. The second change cleans up the case where offset is non zero.
Please pull the from:
https://bitbucket.org/adfin/linux-fs.git wip-invalidatepage
This simple patchset came from the changes I made while working on f
