On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 03:33:14PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 17:21:39 +0100 > Vincent Donnefort <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 09:15:41AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Thu, 27 Aug 2026 07:31:23 +0100 > > > Vincent Donnefort <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Looking at the function again, shouldn't we add > > > > !rb_is_static(cpu_buffer) as > > > > well to the full page test? > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > -- Steve > > > > So that the splice can make progress when the ring-buffer is presistent or > > user-mapped. Or do we say that's expected behaviour? > > > > Ah yeah, I see. Hmm, looking at the code to see how this would work, I > think I found another bug. Let me look deeper into it. > > -- Steve
A bug if we allow rb_is_static()? If not, shall I add it to my series? -- Vincent
