From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E125547075 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:47:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791445624; cv=none; b=X8VpUOGJBvBg20QaXKUQFs0Mz4dMDPWRkrldUjYdnosSRX1s8qEVUKbh82Nvqo77OwKVzFs3qWVy91TgdboBQkIm2ZPy8vgGd2iaLEtH/sJtTEMUyAQ07zTQAEhhMua6PQa5wlaIhRSCueX0DTqHXdv+45uY02yBcQEnXp2lOUY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791445624; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8Qq9Lw8WUa+kjTyRj2GbXRds+UuXiwQfglJjBDI6Yxw=; h=Message-ID:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date; b=IcX32C8ZX0kqxqvlpJPpI6SQWS9V+JfuxS+JcdfSUeDir0E6QKuziG16OEBWRgKqbshVgrR4dYAlVNnz8oIB1djf9cpHTmzhsIPDoaLp3irpMsBhyAgWbVNm+nq3E3+cPfNCM+3/VVelcYOzV51OtXlYy7s5VJ6WefMQ/txxMKQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=a0s2/UKc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="a0s2/UKc" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C244B1F000FF; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 07:47:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1791445623; bh=8Qq9Lw8WUa+kjTyRj2GbXRds+UuXiwQfglJjBDI6Yxw=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=a0s2/UKcUSgK2xy5vAKbkqNb0F2zHNuzY0SBuGGwtauFMV8EzNCIWxr1CfGHc/N4E 6sMEvGOvmeOFgLwOCQ092qtiMAfFiPr2obl1b6jPVsTSx4zMwhFhaM/aJ0XvbG5nfl cXePVRHhCrU8Hq/zz24QvPXf5lsxoHFsx9Cc1LyfxaDLZyxWCG3gyrcanSLueWP86t gMC93FqksQxmqwqSDzXBKKveCX32HAN2ePcwuZwzMldVEM+quylwJZtcQS66F3CIUe p3b9+4JlRqrba6LIEPPCwL8sRlpNtWy/rI3lTaO/++GwZomXyzWbFO5cXdefKhr1QB /Q5skYpVU64xA== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: test reads after a failed zeroout of an unwritten extent Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Daejun Park" Cc: tytso@mit.edu, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261008-ext4-zeroout-eio-test-v1-1-9bb66deaf646@samsung.com> References: <20261008-ext4-zeroout-eio-test-v1-1-9bb66deaf646@samsung.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 08 Oct 2026 07:47:02 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] fs/ext4: Script submitted to wrong repository (fstests vs kernel) - [Medium] ext4/xfstests: Typo in _require_scratch_ext4_feature_enabled fun= ction call -- commit 15df6b5040afb28bc9e8fcc362919219d21014ba Author: Daejun Park ext4: test reads after a failed zeroout of an unwritten extent This commit adds a new test script to verify that reading blocks from an unwritten extent returns zeroes after a failed zeroout operation. It uses dm-error to simulate the failure and ensures ext4 doesn't cache the unzeroed blocks. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261008-ext4-fc-zeroout-v2-1-55cab1e24fa3@= samsung.com > diff --git a/tests/ext4/309 b/tests/ext4/309 > new file mode 100755 > index 0000000000000..1fafd58263577 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/tests/ext4/309 > @@ -0,0 +1,87 @@ > +#! /bin/bash > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > +# Copyright (c) 2026 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. All Rights Reserved. > +# > +# FS QA Test No. 309 [ ... ] > +. ./common/preamble > +_begin_fstest auto quick rw prealloc eio [Severity: Medium] Does this script belong in the fstests repository instead of the Linux kern= el tree?=20 The use of the common preamble and _begin_fstest demonstrates a dependency on the xfstests framework. Applying this patch to the kernel tree will result in a non-functional script with unresolved dependencies. [ ... ] > +_require_scratch > +_require_dm_target error > +_require_xfs_io_command "falloc" > +_require_xfs_io_command "fiemap" > +_require_scratch_ext4_feature_enabled "extent" [Severity: Medium] Is there a typo in this function call? The function _require_scratch_ext4_feature_enabled does not appear to exist and should likely be _require_scratch_ext4_feature. This requirement check will fail silently (printing an error but continuing execution), potentially causing the test to run on unsupported configurations. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261008-ext4-zeroo= ut-eio-test-v1-1-9bb66deaf646@samsung.com?part=3D1