Re: process killed: text file modification

On 2017. 03. 21. 3:40, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Gergely Czuczy wrote:
> [stuff snipped]
>> Actually I want to test it, but you guys are so vehemently discussing
>> it, I thought it would be better to do so, once you guys settled your
>> analysis on the code. Also, me not having the problem occurring, I don't
>> think would mean it's solved, since that would only mean, the codepath
>> for my specific usecase works. There might be other things there as
>> well, what I don't hit.
> I hope by vehemently, you didn't find my comments as nasty. If they did
> come out that way, it was not what I intended and I apologize.
Oh, totally not. I barely meant that you guys are right in the middle of 
the technical discussion, and it doesn't seemed settled.
>
>> Let me know which patch should I test, and I will see to it in the next
>> couple of days, when I get the time to do it.
> I've attached it here again and, yes, I would agree that the results you get
> from testing are just another data point and not definitive.
> (I'd say this statement is true of all testing of nontrivial code.)
>
> Thanks in advance for any testing you can do, rick
Updated the tree and the patch has applied:
# patch < /home/phoemix/textmod.patch
Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|--- fs/nfsclient/nfs_clvnops.c.text    2017-03-16 21:55:16.263393000 -0400
|+++ fs/nfsclient/nfs_clvnops.c 2017-03-17 09:31:23.632814000 -0400
--------------------------
Patching file fs/nfsclient/nfs_clvnops.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 140.
Hunk #2 succeeded at 177.
Hunk #3 succeeded at 3375.
done

When I'm back home from work, I will check the build out, and see how it 
goes.

And thank you very much guys for working on fixing this one.

-czg