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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E408C35242 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:23:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340C520708 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 22:23:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=osandov-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@osandov-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="ebUWlOGV" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727567AbgBKWXr (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Feb 2020 17:23:47 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:41226 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727566AbgBKWXr (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Feb 2020 17:23:47 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id j9so143837pfa.8 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:23:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=osandov-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xg0CTgImhuNBjklYUgaKo95yHzvGv/Ra+RK9xC15ymo=; b=ebUWlOGVyCEwah8yNl+AotrKbO46qIk/Qn80A9OgmsIrCXVQpBcV2dQVE4h+qOVs63 3J/LnIPNFdSxy+l3HrBdmrWxa1IOrPseq8gj7Wuwv12BadWSU2To6V1fR5vxjcH9hoNT 4fIa/LWCkp+ghwnEvAHkuAONjVW8Tf+n6nJVnQEQWQEYP0WUOp5lZnZ32yXyqAOmcx9m 7g3nPcTYWr6c4PFjONWlPAvVs0ACT/O8Ya52P9ZRN3507SyvJN/PMOu4Lctqlyf3Cspl xherKfWaXB4SOf9/pV4gLpePAusuUXlEWu69aSqLntrdHstUyGxcR+pUR7HKrlhtjdT2 XBHg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=xg0CTgImhuNBjklYUgaKo95yHzvGv/Ra+RK9xC15ymo=; b=I6WjpRMg1KcYDuGgvnVJYRBu3S25KHtOrXow1qVMCGlCfe3wzmdUKKsCfmQOEHqCNj Lbfx5J9xtbwNEMoawL4D+Tdj2uzLCS8LLM/hncPjsdfF+eD4vrw901fZKAsBkor0Mb60 2CduN+iGWZqSSY/AZKHaHZQlRbvRPmZH1PCXakU1o6VZ75AQhunsY6BSOxTRfzZFf6D7 FYPEozYxAnLo+y+/2C0XeOqLzEGTguUXzjWnALLqbgqi7+LOwm+MiBzsA7pPruRRkHk/ fb2oY3eejsgQnAQbqOQ/i84pEpdIdqc4CFzXoLkwuCX8a0IzS2vRaFdkB+oi48gAsVFK 2faA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVcKxCDrzSOwewy+k7TMiNcnLtFALFGd383C67Yr+p4qfjmdlSZ 9TJSqmPQnHCEbUJ7X5JyNkI48w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzDbotXR3HCxXdQu4taDUsD3ZPuBn1Il6vdmoS0W+uyrH4iOyoGbEEhh4Qb/wbvRGhd79uRlA== X-Received: by 2002:a65:4685:: with SMTP id h5mr9481255pgr.203.1581459826229; Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:23:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from vader ([2620:10d:c090:200::1:80ca]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d14sm5630909pfq.117.2020.02.11.14.23.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:23:45 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:23:45 -0800 From: Omar Sandoval To: "sunke (E)" Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, osandov@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH blktests v4] nbd/003:add mount and clear_sock test for nbd Message-ID: <20200211222345.GI100751@vader> References: <1577071109-68332-1-git-send-email-sunke32@huawei.com> <8ece15f7-addf-44b2-0b54-4e1a450037f2@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8ece15f7-addf-44b2-0b54-4e1a450037f2@huawei.com> Sender: linux-block-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:15:35AM +0800, sunke (E) wrote: > Hi Omar, > > The nbd/003 you simplified does the same I want to do and I made some small > changes. I ran the simplified nbd/003 with linux kernel at the commit > 7e0165b2f1a, it could pass.Then, I rollbacked the linux kernel to commit > 090bb803708, it indeed triggered the BUGON. > > However, there is one difference. NBD has ioctl and netlink interfaces. I > use the netlink interface and the simplified nbd/003 use the ioctl > interface. The nbd/003 with the netlink interface indeed seem to trigger > some other issue. So, can it be nbd/004? Sure, how about we add a flag to mount_clear_sock that specifies to use the netlink interface instead of the ioctl interface, and make nbd/004 which is the same as nbd/003 expect it runs it with the netlink flag?