Re: more candidates for a waiver
On Tue, Jan 08, Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> I may be reading this the wrong way, but:
>
> > I have some more fails, which are canditates for a waiver:
> >
> > /tset/LSB.os/aio/aio_error/T.aio_error 1 FAIL
> > /tset/LSB.os/aio/aio_read/T.aio_read 1 FAIL
> > /tset/LSB.os/aio/aio_read/T.aio_read 11 FAIL
> > /tset/LSB.os/aio/aio_return/T.aio_return 1 FAIL
> > /tset/LSB.os/aio/aio_write/T.aio_write 1 FAIL
> > /tset/LSB.os/aio/aio_write/T.aio_write 12 FAIL
> >
> > I think all aio test cases should be waiver, it depends heavy if you
> > have a SMP or non-SMP system, how fast it is and which other processes
> > are running ...
>
>
> This sounds like the behavior of async I/O is unpredictable in
> a bad way (influenced by system config and/or load), and it's
> proposed that that behavior should be waived? Reading it that
> way, anyway, I disagree.
The complete current aio implementation on Linux does not work
reliable and we should waive it complete.
There is a project with a new aio implementation which should work,
but it will need some time.
Thorsten
--
Thorsten Kukuk http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/ kukuk@suse.de
SuSE GmbH Deutschherrenstr. 15-19 D-90429 Nuernberg
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Key fingerprint = A368 676B 5E1B 3E46 CFCE 2D97 F8FD 4E23 56C6 FB4B
Reply to: