From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 9AF5326D5DC for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 17:39:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739900391; cv=none; b=f7Qy+2ViY3vTYzHlLcKqzH+DM0xbHmXn7TgAevWs/Iu+s/Y54fagJRyZEiEKS4VM3W4f8vIGu7HA3YJXlTgE9xiLqxouAtE3DoZUO3kcmI3tBkLkHlyd9HqyjkbtDKPXL4jzzuiV/czw6SLWZCAqtj1y5C79Msjt6kAzXQt8nU4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739900391; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1YLGRftFE1KDpikmwJi5IxzCNkUbPlETyh8uQCFrZeg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=oIPlUftYzWUCEQXq0LIxA9ITVnWVaSitXuIIvREA8Uz7+WRu+JLnqNBfPcMmiBKxIyJq3/8O+L5GMY2YLWSFmEMTyK0c+eFYjGr1SZKSDEWqYQqAJtbYXvt2iuIx1JBkWrY9rZ6kkKIzNMGkKEjp3Efi2QAv356U7qQ4djNiIWU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=uQAO+s1b; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="uQAO+s1b" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1E838C4CEE2; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 17:39:51 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1739900391; bh=1YLGRftFE1KDpikmwJi5IxzCNkUbPlETyh8uQCFrZeg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=uQAO+s1b1ZGCM3kq++AmennxFFk46aoyTbP0KQQu6OQ7JzgitVjQW+zNN+3q1ahOZ OsdUpkCi1Ya3mHyJtI7O4HkQq66kaJ1ToUL8xP9z9z7IjYx/NMsDn/NybhfBcZEY8w +5EI8Q6XSo6S8gNqkkj6iuUXUWZ3mufHVUL/66ZBsL/n2WTcPV2/9TBTN+uMkwl6+N RpFJV6XC9Zi4cVqNEIxdeKjSJUdIbli8MytumqJxjtHkMqoKL0zRiVYjOiTf1J3dbv v+9YQQiOcJGaIEM8dU3nMEwOQwMoWPalvkZ6/lAXaf1oqnlOt/vJOgOhRsTdnuYi1V I9q5dBr3dDrXg== Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 09:39:50 -0800 From: "Darrick J. Wong" To: Eric Sandeen Cc: Eric Sandeen , "fstests@vger.kernel.org" , Namjae Jeon Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic: test zero-byte writes to new file Message-ID: <20250218173950.GL21799@frogsfrogsfrogs> References: <20250213195129.GZ21799@frogsfrogsfrogs> <20250214040220.GA21799@frogsfrogsfrogs> <65457d9b-c435-40eb-9531-6fd23c48ae75@sandeen.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: fstests@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <65457d9b-c435-40eb-9531-6fd23c48ae75@sandeen.net> On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 08:36:25AM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 2/13/25 10:02 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 09:17:28PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> On 2/13/25 2:50 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >>> On 2/13/25 1:51 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > >> > >> ... > >> > >>>>> +rm -f $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq > >>>>> +$XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite 0 0" $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq > >>>>> +test -f $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq || _fail "file not created" > >>>> > >>>> When does the file not get created? > >>> > >>> In some unknown error case? ;) > >>> There's probably no reason for that test, though of course > >>> it's still expected to pass. > >>> > >>> In the various discussions of the exfat bug scattered around > >>> the internet people kept pointing out that "well, the file does > >>> get created" so I probably had that on my mind. > >> > >> To put a finer point on it, because I can't tell for sure - are > >> you asking me to take that test out? > > > > Nah, I was just wondering if there was something about the buggy exfat > > code that either prevented the file from being created, or if the bug > > was that the empty file got deleted after the zero-byte pwrite and I > > misunderstood what's going on. > > Ah, I see. No, the observable problem was an -EFAULT on the write, > and the file /does/ get created as expected. The test probably is > extraneous to the original bug, because of course open(O_CREAT) and > write(0) are two separate operations. I was just a bit over-eager > when writing the test. Would you mind resending, but with the rm removed? --D > Thanks, > -Eric > > > (IOWs I think this test is fine, but could the exfat maintainer > > clarify?) > > > > --D > > > >> Thanks, > >> -Eric > >> > >> > > > >