From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fanotify01: Test setting two marks on different filesystems
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 15:44:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240125144453.GB398849@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxjMiPG5E5=jirxT_D=NDxdUfA2Vp8u1yNZ=YH_SxC0S8Q@mail.gmail.com>
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 2:23 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz> wrote:
> > > When tested fs has zero fsid (e.g. fuse) and events are reported
> > > with fsid+fid, watching different filesystems with the same group is
> > > not supported.
> > > Try to setup a bogus mark on test tmp dir, in addition to the mark
> > > on the tested filesystem, to check if marks on different filesystems
> > > are supported.
> > > Run on all filesystem to test both fs with zero fsid (e.g. fuse) and
> > > fs with valid fsid.
> > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > Hi Amir,
> > > Petr,
> > > The fanotify tests changes that you already picked from my github [1]
> > > have to do with fixing new test failures in v6.7 and v6.8-rc1, dues to
> > > the fact that each of those kernel versions added new filesystems that
> > > support fanotify events with fid+fsid.
> > > This is the only change to test new functionality in v6.8-rc1, namely,
> > > that for fs with zero fsid (e.g. fuse), an fanotify group can watch a
> > > single fs instance.
> > This patch would have to be rebased, to be applicable of the previous one (which
> > touches more tests) in your branch.
> I don't understand - this patch is already rebased.
I meant, you sent just this 2nd commit, without 1st commit
f80dc512e ("fanotify{01,09,10}: Check for report fid support with mount mark")
Therefore this commit is not applicable. I got just confused you send only
this commit with without the previous one...
> I have it in my branch after the fix patches:
> 7db2dac9f (HEAD -> fanotify_fsid) fanotify01: Test setting two marks
> on different filesystems
> f80dc512e fanotify{01,09,10}: Check for report fid support with mount mark
> 9062824a7 (master) fanotify16: Fix test failure on FUSE
> ea085713f fanotify{14,15,16}: Check for filesystem mark support on filesystem
> 921f0ce86 fanotify13: Use generic check for mark type support on filesystem
> > I also wonder what I did wrong, the branch works after reboot, tested on:
> > 1) mainline kernel 6.8.0-rc1 in rapido-linux
> > 2) openSUSE kernel 6.8.0-rc1-2.gf4ba5db-default
> > 3) 6.7.0-9.gaedda80-default
> Which branch works? LTP master branch?
I meant HEAD of your fanotify_fsid branch.
> My claim is that with the current LTP master branch, fanotify01,09,10
> would fail on kernel 6.8.0-rc1 when running with
> LTP_DEV_FS_TYPE=exfat (not LTP_SINGLE_FS_TYPE=exfat)
I'm sorry, I overlooked the different variable.
I see LTP_DEV_FS_TYPE=exfat gets EOPNOTSUPP on LTP master on 6.8.0-rc1:
fanotify01.c:106: TBROK: fanotify_mark(3, 0x11, 0x3b, ..., fs_mnt/tfile_4503) failed: EOPNOTSUPP (95)
> So at least you should consider applying this fix for the release:
> f80dc512e fanotify{01,09,10}: Check for report fid support with mount mark
I see. Yes, I reproduced the problem and thus cherry-picked and merged this one
as bae8ec9a3.
Although this patch (the 2nd commit) should also work everywhere, I'll backport
it just after the release.
Thanks a lot for explanation and sorry for the confusion.
Kind regards,
Petr
> Thanks,
> Amir.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-25 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-25 11:05 [LTP] [PATCH] fanotify01: Test setting two marks on different filesystems Amir Goldstein
2024-01-25 12:23 ` Petr Vorel
2024-01-25 13:45 ` Amir Goldstein
2024-01-25 14:44 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2024-01-26 7:38 ` Amir Goldstein
2024-01-26 11:44 ` Jan Kara
2024-01-30 13:07 ` Petr Vorel
2024-01-30 14:58 ` Amir Goldstein
2024-01-30 18:44 ` Petr Vorel
2024-01-30 19:22 ` Amir Goldstein
2024-01-30 20:26 ` Petr Vorel
2024-01-30 21:31 ` Jan Kara
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=20240125144453.GB398849@pevik \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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.