From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 03:19:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Erwan Velu Message-ID: <1678347027.185727.1470640779017.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <0523eea4-0332-2b8e-a595-fd66cd6ae3de@kernel.dk> References: <48aea5d8-12a5-58ca-9008-913e13bc7a8d@kernel.dk> <4ac1a598-480e-bfa6-3704-929c909be5da@kernel.dk> <0523eea4-0332-2b8e-a595-fd66cd6ae3de@kernel.dk> Subject: Re: Unlink after each loop in job MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Jens Axboe Cc: Martin Dev , fio@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hey Jens, I don't see where the patch is, did I missed something ? ----- Mail original ----- De: "Jens Axboe" =C3=80: "Martin Dev" , fio@vger.kernel.org Envoy=C3=A9: Vendredi 5 Ao=C3=BBt 2016 15:50:53 Objet: Re: Unlink after each loop in job On 08/05/2016 01:31 AM, Martin Dev wrote: > Hey Jens, > > I applied your patch, but it doesn't unlink the file as it continues > at the !fio_file_open(f) in unlink_files(), run for 2 loops > > Clear State: 0 > Clear State: 1 > Doing unlink > Starting file loop > File is not open! > > I assume it's OK to flip it and check if the file is open then > continue (so not to unlink files that are potentially still in use) > > I'll update the readme/docs and fio.1 as suggested. The file_open() should just be removed, at best, or at least we should=20 flip the check, it doesn't make a lot of sense to only unlink if it's=20 open. In any case, it doesn't really matter if it's open or not, last=20 user will drop it. So I'd just drop that check. --=20 Jens Axboe