Hello!
Yes, your patch fixed this bug.
Thank you very much!
With best regards,
Sergei.
On 01.08.2019 19:14, NeilBrown wrote:
On Thu, Aug 01 2019, Sergei Turchanov wrote:
Hello!
[
As suggested in previous discussion this behavior may be caused by your
commit 1f4aace60b0e (&qu
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
On 2019/8/1 14:16, Sergei Turchanov wrote:
$ ./test /proc/meminfo 0 # Works as expected
MemTotal: 394907728 kB
MemFree: 173738328 kB
...
DirectMap2M: 13062144 kB
DirectMap1G: 390070272 kB
--
t just now and it seems fine... but I haven't digged into
this commit.
Maybe you could Cc NeilBrown for some more advice and
I have no idea whether it's an expected behavior or not...
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
On 2019/8/1 14:16, Sergei Turchanov wrote:
Hello!
(I sent this e-mail two weeks
Hello!
(I sent this e-mail two weeks ago with no feedback. Does anyone care?
Wrong mailing list? Anything?)
Seeking (to an offset within file size) in /proc/meminfo is broken in
4.19.59. It does seek to a desired position, but reading from that
position returns the remainder of file and
Hello!
Seeking (to an offset within file size) in /proc/meminfo is broken in
4.19.59. It does seek to a desired position, but reading from that
position returns the remainder of file and then a whole copy of file.
This doesn't happen with /proc/vmstat or /proc/self/maps for example.
Seeking
5 matches
Mail list logo