From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
Cc: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
"lkp@intel.com" <lkp@intel.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
"oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev" <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"ltp@lists.linux.it" <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [linux-next:master] [scsi] eca2040972: ltp.ioprio_set03.fail
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 09:32:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230622073256.GA482307@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZJMYP/CCVviG6IMq@x1-carbon>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 02:47:43PM +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> > Hi!
> > > > kernel test robot noticed "ltp.ioprio_set03.fail" on:
> > > LTP maintainers,
> > > Patches have been submitted to fix this issue. Were these patches applied ?
> > Looks like they are in, at least these two:
> > ioprio: use ioprio.h kernel header if it exists
> > ioprio: Use IOPRIO_PRIO_NUM to check prio range
> > And there does not seem to be anything ioprio related haning in the LTP
> > patchwork.
Hi Niklas,
> Hello Cyril, Petr, Damien,
> I just ran LTP master + linux-next and the test case passes for me.
> Although, note that even if you are using LTP master,
> the way that the LTP header:
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioprio/ioprio.h
> is written, you will need to run
> make headers_install
> with linux-next kernel source,
> before running
> make autotools && ./configure
> in LTP.
> Otherwise LTP will use the kernel uapi headers from your distro,
> which does not perform the new checks for the IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE()
> macro. (It requires linux uapi headers from linux-next.)
Yes, it should do otherwise more tests would be often broken.
> Does the linux kernel test robot not run
> make headers_install
> before running
> make autotools && ./configure
> in LTP?
I guess that's the question for Damien (I and Cyril have nothing to do with
kernel test robot). I wonder myself.
> One option, although I'm not sure if we want this,
> is to change
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioprio/ioprio.h
> to do something like:
> #ifndef IOPRIO_BAD_VALUE
> # define IOPRIO_BAD_VALUE(val, max) ((val) < 0 || (val) >= (max))
> #endif
> such that LTP does not need to be compiled against the kernel uapi
> headers that match the running kernel.
> But... shouldn't the installed uapi headers match the running kernel?
Yes, whatever kernel version (stable, enterprise, mainline, linux-next, ...) is
being tested, the tester should make sure LTP is compiled against correct
headers.
Kind regards,
Petr
> Kind regards,
> Niklas
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
Cc: "lkp@intel.com" <lkp@intel.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
"oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev" <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"ltp@lists.linux.it" <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [linux-next:master] [scsi] eca2040972: ltp.ioprio_set03.fail
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2023 09:32:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230622073256.GA482307@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZJMYP/CCVviG6IMq@x1-carbon>
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 02:47:43PM +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> > Hi!
> > > > kernel test robot noticed "ltp.ioprio_set03.fail" on:
> > > LTP maintainers,
> > > Patches have been submitted to fix this issue. Were these patches applied ?
> > Looks like they are in, at least these two:
> > ioprio: use ioprio.h kernel header if it exists
> > ioprio: Use IOPRIO_PRIO_NUM to check prio range
> > And there does not seem to be anything ioprio related haning in the LTP
> > patchwork.
Hi Niklas,
> Hello Cyril, Petr, Damien,
> I just ran LTP master + linux-next and the test case passes for me.
> Although, note that even if you are using LTP master,
> the way that the LTP header:
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioprio/ioprio.h
> is written, you will need to run
> make headers_install
> with linux-next kernel source,
> before running
> make autotools && ./configure
> in LTP.
> Otherwise LTP will use the kernel uapi headers from your distro,
> which does not perform the new checks for the IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE()
> macro. (It requires linux uapi headers from linux-next.)
Yes, it should do otherwise more tests would be often broken.
> Does the linux kernel test robot not run
> make headers_install
> before running
> make autotools && ./configure
> in LTP?
I guess that's the question for Damien (I and Cyril have nothing to do with
kernel test robot). I wonder myself.
> One option, although I'm not sure if we want this,
> is to change
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioprio/ioprio.h
> to do something like:
> #ifndef IOPRIO_BAD_VALUE
> # define IOPRIO_BAD_VALUE(val, max) ((val) < 0 || (val) >= (max))
> #endif
> such that LTP does not need to be compiled against the kernel uapi
> headers that match the running kernel.
> But... shouldn't the installed uapi headers match the running kernel?
Yes, whatever kernel version (stable, enterprise, mainline, linux-next, ...) is
being tested, the tester should make sure LTP is compiled against correct
headers.
Kind regards,
Petr
> Kind regards,
> Niklas
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-22 7:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-20 5:58 [LTP] [linux-next:master] [scsi] eca2040972: ltp.ioprio_set03.fail kernel test robot
2023-06-20 5:58 ` kernel test robot
2023-06-20 7:42 ` Damien Le Moal
2023-06-20 7:42 ` [LTP] " Damien Le Moal
2023-06-21 12:47 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-06-21 12:47 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-06-21 15:33 ` Niklas Cassel
2023-06-21 15:33 ` Niklas Cassel via ltp
2023-06-22 7:32 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2023-06-22 7:32 ` Petr Vorel
2023-06-22 8:30 ` Damien Le Moal
2023-06-22 8:30 ` Damien Le Moal
2023-06-22 8:00 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-06-22 8:00 ` Cyril Hrubis
2023-07-05 8:36 ` Liu, Yujie
2023-07-05 8:36 ` Liu, Yujie
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230622073256.GA482307@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.