From: Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@google.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@google.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] eventpoll: Fix epoll_wait() report false negative
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 09:27:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87340exm2o.fsf@yellow.woof> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260429-november-speisen-3084d769d316@brauner>
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> writes:
> The selftests rely on this behavior that timeout=0 sees events from a
> concurrently running producer. They would fail at a very higher rate
> after this change - believe me I had a similar patch that changed
> something in this area.
Huh, that's interesting. Do you still remember which selftest cases rely
on this behavior? I would like to study them further.
> I would explore the seqcount that Mateusz suggested tbh.
I will investigate that.
Nam
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-29 7:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-18 7:52 [PATCH 0/2] eventpoll: Fix epoll_wait() report false negative Nam Cao
2025-07-18 7:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] selftests/eventpoll: Add test for multiple waiters Nam Cao
2025-07-18 7:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] eventpoll: Fix epoll_wait() report false negative Nam Cao
2025-07-18 8:38 ` Soheil Hassas Yeganeh
2025-07-18 8:59 ` Nam Cao
2026-04-29 6:54 ` Christian Brauner
2026-04-29 7:27 ` Nam Cao [this message]
2026-04-29 15:34 ` Mateusz Guzik
2026-05-03 13:24 ` Nam Cao
2026-05-04 12:00 ` David Laight
2025-09-17 12:49 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 13:41 ` Nam Cao
2025-09-17 16:05 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 16:08 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 18:03 ` Khazhy Kumykov
2025-09-17 22:28 ` Khazhy Kumykov
2025-09-17 22:38 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-22 6:26 ` Nam Cao
2025-09-20 14:42 ` David Laight
2025-09-20 14:45 ` Mateusz Guzik
2025-09-17 7:27 ` [PATCH 0/2] " Nam Cao
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=87340exm2o.fsf@yellow.woof \
--to=namcao@linutronix.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=khazhy@google.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=soheil@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willemb@google.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.