From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh3-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh3-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.154]) (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 6D4981DFD1; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 15:04:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.154 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725980661; cv=none; b=Ili/u7QAbT1b8fe6yjKQUM+/uGIlTu9HBfkHLFo0swmMHJsuQVnfYBoRfhxDyKmAi11tE7eWSAc9ekAa/Wbb2wD009arnEo9/qW40UUw5JlkG0MV8BdL5ZimTsQ5W21YiH82N7hH++Ghun1JpD6m3GMhXwVVKNSD3M64M8QVqsE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1725980661; c=relaxed/simple; bh=N7P1T6Kvc4/Yh/5fEfz+gkYqzdjCXV5jPHq9NhdWqbY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=bY/3t8HX18tcidSs0n+O+1YKq5yrM3tKs90juuJJ6fGVaNH1LzgugB7mnPW4rtCHIwMcFrM+1wpJNNIgtSc+TN9q09qajmed9Sen7DYfs6uVzP5ew46jpr89k5NEVJg1ChWktZNDg9t1Z9W7KfA328Fco+vVrSJOgFOfl3fRqRo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=alyssa.is; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alyssa.is; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=alyssa.is header.i=@alyssa.is header.b=LHNi8WUS; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=hswDu5xG; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.154 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=alyssa.is Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alyssa.is Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=alyssa.is header.i=@alyssa.is header.b="LHNi8WUS"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="hswDu5xG" Received: from phl-compute-03.internal (phl-compute-03.phl.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2A811401C4; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:04:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-03.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:04:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alyssa.is; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1725980657; x=1726067057; bh=5JhK7hUypX /GjDaw+3onzCocPeW1IDBBuZSItakM/3E=; b=LHNi8WUSWhYY3EXrw3n1PPLRml gVv+Lvdx70aIPYdFUXMelygywGHJcaNK5Xkto8eXBnyAqENfgmiA6BkXXOGLqzmJ 1RowphZzPzDUvXInTCJX06aSusXZZgZh+UZrMMgkraceJNuELVWUmJSyEytifNAQ WiyVGpbUEYXzuDOQb9E67IiIFw6ogO9ftv+z/q+21G4sOlAnhbXMCC84oHlZOswl JSMTmR18lL9tjHC/NXU1vxAWUrJyA38+NgEaH6qb1jd/sM1fGnq7lc4O0jZ0/Atz 5uXTvujwuqjS/TKsCvNwRGw0pGUs9hfjGeer+1VzZK7wRsuGu64qavUAiTdg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1725980657; x=1726067057; bh=5JhK7hUypX/GjDaw+3onzCocPeW1 IDBBuZSItakM/3E=; b=hswDu5xGdezvdEUSEFca+3DIvKg86cUOdLHNJV/o5Oiu chw5o5M7pJf4IKi9VoW+xOPfAe6JhemvLte5pwLqBxGv4DDH4kfdjOMmalIiuduP r5SOFR5qNyeCrfWvzoVDd4QGtUFWIMFka7qPH3rAqOE3ogEijdcB26pCHh4SRfWp aD4WlRIIcN84vNjmsNJ+tYtkrmBALVFHiS1fkaCOlQ05c8c0Qtbmu4Y5X7EOcvZQ nF2/Hh5/EXZsFpYOBNRPOy+z70F/hWNNcT7rNSs6jcDGJhDmYqbW7VSS5gG5v1jd d7zJbH+t4msYfBV0im1IfrPIGGS/zhQbjSOoWiHNGg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrudeiledgjeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkgggtsehgtderredttdejnecu hfhrohhmpeetlhihshhsrgcutfhoshhsuceohhhisegrlhihshhsrgdrihhsqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpeeiledthfdvjeefhfduueekvedtvdfgleelfeetvdetkeekvefffedt feegfeevffenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmpdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrgh enucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehhihes rghlhihsshgrrdhishdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepfedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpd hrtghpthhtohepiihlrghnghesrhgvughhrghtrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepfhhsthgv shhtshesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehlihhnuhigqdgstg grtghhvghfshesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i12284293:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 11:04:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sf.qyliss.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 869D0300E8753; Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:04:14 +0200 (CEST) From: Alyssa Ross To: Zorro Lang Cc: fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] generic: test negative timespecs are accurate In-Reply-To: <20240910135226.hfwk774mdzztqdxv@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> References: <20240907154527.604864-2-hi@alyssa.is> <20240909080132.4wliimcb2y4bt7u3@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> <8734m7hlnm.fsf@alyssa.is> <20240910135226.hfwk774mdzztqdxv@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 17:04:03 +0200 Message-ID: <87zfofczz0.fsf@alyssa.is> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Zorro Lang writes: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 12:02:05PM +0200, Alyssa Ross wrote: >> Zorro Lang writes: >>=20 >> > On Sat, Sep 07, 2024 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Alyssa Ross wrote: >> >> Link: https://github.com/koverstreet/bcachefs/issues/743 >> > >> > Great, a bcachefs regression test case :) >> > >> > Can you add a bit more details in commit log, not only a link. >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Alyssa Ross >> >> --- >> >> This is an adapted version of generic/258, but it tests that the stor= ed=20 >> >> timestamp is accurate to the second, rather than just testing the=20 >> >> timestamp remains negative. I created a new test rather than just >> >> making 258 more precise, because I understand that there may be >> >> filesystems that don't store timestamps that accurately by design. >> >> As an example, I've heard that FAT only has 2 second precision, so th= is >> >> patch is an RFC because I'm not sure how I should write a _require >> >> function (if at all) that restricts the test to filesystems that are >> >> expected to be able to do this. >> >>=20 >> >> tests/generic/363 | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> tests/generic/363.out | 2 ++ >> > >> > The g/363 has been taken, please rebase to latest for-next branch. >> > You can use `xfstests/tools/mvtest generic/363 generic/365` to change >> > the case number, before rebasing. >> > >> >> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+) >> >> create mode 100755 tests/generic/363 >> >> create mode 100644 tests/generic/363.out >> >>=20 >> >> diff --git a/tests/generic/363 b/tests/generic/363 >> >> new file mode 100755 >> >> index 00000000..50459d01 >> >> --- /dev/null >> >> +++ b/tests/generic/363 >> >> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ >> >> +#! /bin/bash >> >> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 >> >> +# Copyright (c) 2011 Red Hat, Inc. All Rights Reserved. >> >> +# Copyright (c) 2024 Alyssa Ross. All Rights Reserved. >> >> +# >> >> +# FS QA Test 363 >> >> +# >> >> +# Test timestamps prior to epoch with nanosecond components are >> >> +# accurate to the second. >> >> +# bcachefs was slightly off. >> >> +# >> >> +. ./common/preamble >> >> +_begin_fstest auto quick bigtime >> >> + >> > >> > As this's a bcachefs regression test: >> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-bcachefs/20240907160024.605850-3-hi@alys= sa.is/ >> > >> > So better to mark as: >> > if [ "$FSTYP" =3D "bcachefs" ];then >> > _fixed_by_kernel_commit xxxxxxxxxxxx "bcachefs: Fix negative timespec= s" >> > fi >> > (replace the xxxxxxx if it's merged on mainline linux) >> > >> > Others looks good to me, with above changes, I'd like to >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Zorro Lang >>=20 >> Thanks! So you don't think the test needs to express any extra >> requirement that filesystems support to-the-second precision? > > Oh, does this test needs 1 second precision? I thought you concerned some > filesystems cannot be the epoch you set. The _require_negative_timestamps > will skip the test from exfat and ceph. It doesn't help the FAT, maybe you > want to add vfat to _require_negative_timestamps. > > I thought you might want to output the stored timestamp (accurate to the > second) to reproduce this bug, if not, why you hope to write this new one, > not use the g/258 to be the reproducer directly? I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. I explained why I created a new test in my commentary =E2=80=94 g/258 doesn't require 1 second precisio= n, and this test does. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEH9wgcxqlHM/ARR3h+dvtSFmyccAFAmbgX+MACgkQ+dvtSFmy ccCd6A/8Dpo8wVyIZ1mB25ZP65YRDd75aGviOaLGXM3RQLP18GIST8s2E2rcQsh/ t2iUSm0LZryUjJbooNrJwmrvQSfm4PItzdjyJVMf+7Lvts83Jvd7FC+6i81v2SCB 6uNsYQU/hMXeQ3Hp1cSYiwUjJiOb0/k5/c3OaDAFTCoOua/ZF+RDnGk1SJrem8mY wf39Z50wR0CHu1HZosafOk5RZNzzMPGFXxXKxuQCIWPxjNKfeX6JO4odV4Q+3uHZ AWm4SxWuWcAZEy5GLz9h1CIH8slFCZ1aNF2sD8NbWfPduMu3pWlERdqXDW97nVzg DibVG4EhRkFcZOzK7gsqivnF0m47UrEMDtjRC+z5/TdyKd4UduRYZCn441Q5rmE3 hez4Liwq1MNSdYHyfOgK5GPR11Tx4ARVkC3QjE/DrjTP/xlxSxPxAQumVmtaYHRE Fi7YMp6sMd0TXYh2kGtKCOjb1rzGRGatOkRhndwoggZUxN3WaysdLI9sR45xLFAD uuX55uFwnc2x2yhxaGa9jkrUlf5D4TNDlfWmZELunyAcslRCqSAYGJu/FZllukFL z0ZGZae4jdBOTUX5CbAKIh959C79hN+krx/VGDZr0mDI0J4ShNxDGkn5aKjOjAXK ggonEpNJNL3Xuk5sggNO8OilUBt+2onsGdaaN44NDXFFmhmgZWo= =nUBu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--