Re: generic/633, generic/696, generic/697 failure on btrfs with rc2/rc3

[Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>]

My bad, forgot to Cc fstests.

在 2026/7/17 16:27, Qu Wenruo 写道:
> Hi,
> 
> It looks like 539dce114465 ("fs: refuse O_TMPFILE creation with an 
> unmapped fsuid or fsgid") has changed the behavior that the above tests 
> will fail on btrfs/ext4/xfs:
> 
> FSTYP         -- ext4
> PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64 btrfs-vm 7.2.0-rc3-custom+ #411 SMP 
> PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Fri Jul 17 16:24:34 ACST 2026
> MKFS_OPTIONS  -- -F /dev/mapper/test-scratch1
> MOUNT_OPTIONS -- -o acl,user_xattr /dev/mapper/test-scratch1 /mnt/scratch
> 
> generic/633  1s ... - output mismatch (see /home/adam/xfstests/results// 
> generic/633.out.bad)
>      --- tests/generic/633.out    2022-05-11 11:25:30.816666664 +0930
>      +++ /home/adam/xfstests/results//generic/633.out.bad    2026-07-17 
> 16:25:45.033967541 +0930
>      @@ -1,2 +1,4 @@
>       QA output created by 633
>       Silence is golden
>      +utils.c: 948: openat_tmpfile_supported - Value too large for 
> defined data type - failure: create
>      +utils.c: 948: openat_tmpfile_supported - Value too large for 
> defined data type - failure: create
>      ...
>      (Run 'diff -u /home/adam/xfstests/tests/generic/633.out /home/adam/ 
> xfstests/results//generic/633.out.bad'  to see the entire diff)
> Ran: generic/633
> Failures: generic/633
> Failed 1 of 1 tests
> 
> Did a quick search but didn't hit an exact fix.
> 
> I guess we need to update the test case to avoid the EOVERFLOW errors?
> 
> Thanks,
> Qu
>