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 lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 5686AD3900B for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 18:43:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vg5q5-0001I5-AT; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 13:43:29 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vg5pj-0001ES-PN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 13:43:09 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1vg5pi-0000m0-Ar for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 13:43:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1768416185; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject: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=f9h2Tg94wNpud6IW9/rV3PHxRBqOK1S4nmqvsiYU+8s=; b=f2uWZRsWG99GNaEFxarW24MfbiiJ4ua78jiAbW1Tgc4sDrPlhwAI3tQ2waCnGYVaTGYWYV D6CBwbpw8/MSQD1IGcGvSRek3XaadaYjAyhEABgIQbjF+/eYN/HJEfgmgEQs6PCYhCTQtw +uAXUtdOi9J+A85/FLzJ2ASysYpGVqg= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-18-tboi7vL5MBGE_i7HULkObw-1; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 13:43:02 -0500 X-MC-Unique: tboi7vL5MBGE_i7HULkObw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: tboi7vL5MBGE_i7HULkObw_1768416181 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (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 mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BCAA180044D; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 18:43:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.253]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7827F19560A7; Wed, 14 Jan 2026 18:43:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 12:42:57 -0600 From: Eric Blake To: Thomas Huth Cc: Kevin Wolf , qemu-block@nongnu.org, Hanna Reitz , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tests/qemu-iotests: Mark 182 as Linux-only Message-ID: References: <20260113141744.97469-1-thuth@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260113141744.97469-1-thuth@redhat.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20251211 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=eblake@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: qemu development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 03:17:44PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote: > From: Thomas Huth > > Running test 182 on FreeBSD fails with this error message in the output: > > +warning: File lock requested but OFD locking syscall is unavailable, falling back to POSIX file locks > +Due to the implementation, locks can be lost unexpectedly. > > OFD locks seem to be only available on Linux, so let's mark this > test as Linux-only to silence the failure. OFD locks are part of POSIX now, so eventually new-enough BSD will have them. Is it worth trying to be more specific and testing for the actual feature that we are depending on, rather than just limiting the test to an early-adopter OS? That said, I don't have any quick ideas on how to do a more-specific feature test, so I don't mind this going in as-is; we already know BSD gets less coverage for other reasons. -- Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. Virtualization: qemu.org | libguestfs.org