From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D356FC021AD for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 04:12:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 166BC3C591E for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 05:12:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (in-4.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81BCB3C23F2 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 05:12:37 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-4.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07DE6101C5BB for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 05:12:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20F71210F6; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 04:12:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1740024754; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=07McuQlGALdudEjSm6FVejAj5zBL43Je1C42umy1klE=; b=R1EyG96fkPlIvRTJQkxH0McD96lnEJuWJDabK9Bm9hw2PcCr1Ph67dR4Jr5j0lkw2cmnp/ jiafCPrzIslG6HVPLGBr6fBl+B8ttIfALL0TTfD81CfjiNkoea/+zYlCG6MDdmjQ2XJ/3o mzUpUWccQ5Cii09hcrMIItY217cLq2M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1740024754; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=07McuQlGALdudEjSm6FVejAj5zBL43Je1C42umy1klE=; b=/hsXyQd+ajxNYsHQuI7YIAKs24EVaYqTZOvT9BifdugVO9E3TBUF2hNHLlp17XOA5hJrUD tkmI0l3hADbh4UAw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1740024753; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=07McuQlGALdudEjSm6FVejAj5zBL43Je1C42umy1klE=; b=sET8wNIZnk00jsPtYvjvbbCYnMRzTf9CPXA5fe471SgeA5ctHH2FvTolJ38vRyk9pGou9d ywL9QcHHXUZAJCaB2BXi5NEUN5qOuXg05g0gID9h1j1/nASIX8nvYXtojqzm+rYpNHdRdd gSo23tuHe8PUnFgh05BIKkgKmHXbBX4= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1740024753; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=07McuQlGALdudEjSm6FVejAj5zBL43Je1C42umy1klE=; b=kGvdts2m9IbkuF72Pi5BTHpETo9Iq/mO1QKQUOFKLu94XDcN+XKXkGl4+iE50u/l4xfEuU nI0Uvlgoq6dPgMAw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 085701393C; Thu, 20 Feb 2025 04:12:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id wxrEALGrtmdQFQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Thu, 20 Feb 2025 04:12:33 +0000 Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 05:12:27 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Jeff Moyer Message-ID: <20250220041227.GA2648636@pevik> References: <20250217215038.177250-1-jmoyer@redhat.com> <20250217215038.177250-4-jmoyer@redhat.com> <20250218125746.GC2469726@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.50 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:email,suse.cz:replyto]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-4.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 3/3] tst_find_backing_dev(): add support for overlayfs X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Jeff, > > LGTM, thanks for a very nice work! > > Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel > > I'd prefer others have look into it before merging. > Sure, any review is appreciated. > > Again, I'll apply minor formatting changes before merge (using SAFE_STAT(), > > moving else branch after break to it's own and checkpatch.pl fixes). > It looks fine, but I will make a couple of observations. > > @@ -634,11 +633,11 @@ static char *overlay_get_upperdir(char *mountpoint) > > upperdir = calloc(optend - optstart + 1, 1); > > memcpy(upperdir, optstart, optend - optstart); > > break; > > - } else { > > - tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, > > - "mount point %s does not contain an upperdir", > > - mountpoint); > > } > > + > > + tst_brkm(TBROK, NULL, > > + "mount point %s does not contain an upperdir", > > + mountpoint); > This is technically different, but I don't think it matters. All > overlay mount points need an upperdir, so it is valid to error out here. FYI my point here was to change: if (...) { foo ... break; } else { bar ... } to: if (...) { foo ... break; } bar ... (IMHO slightly readable + checkpatch.pl prefers it.) Did I overlook something? > > } > > endmntent(mntf); > > @@ -679,26 +678,21 @@ static char *overlay_get_upperdir(char *mountpoint) > > */ > > static void overlay_get_uevent_path(char *tmp_path, char *uevent_path) > > { > > - int ret; > > struct stat st; > > char *mountpoint, *upperdir; > > tst_resm(TINFO, "Use OVERLAYFS specific strategy"); > > - ret = stat(tmp_path, &st); > > - if (ret) > > - tst_brkm(TBROK | TERRNO, NULL, "stat failed"); > > + SAFE_STAT(NULL, tmp_path, &st); > Sorry for not using SAFE_STAT. I don't know how I missed that. Thanks > again for the review and for fixing up these issues. Nah, not a big deal. The patchset is very nice, thanks for that! Kind regards, Petr > Cheers, > Jeff -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp