public inbox for linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: zlang@redhat.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] xfs/018: remove inline xattr recovery tests
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2026 21:22:36 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aYGGHMfca4gbB2vy@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <177005945298.2432878.17951687824065765554.stgit@frogsfrogsfrogs>

On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 11:11:12AM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> 
> Now that we can do xattr updates in a single transaction (as opposed to
> using the attr intent machinery) if we keep the attr structure in short
> format, remove the attr intent item log recovery tests.

I have a bit of a hard time parsing this.  Currently with xfs/for-next
these fail, so removing them fixes it, which is probably what drove
this.

But looking through the patches I'm not sure why they actually are
failing - the updates are logged as part of the inode item, and
nothing in test_attr_replay seems to actually look at log specific
bits?

Only vaguely related, but should we ensure to always clear error
tags after the test runs to ensure they don't leak into other tests?


  reply	other threads:[~2026-02-03  5:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-02-02 19:11 [PATCHSET] fstests: more random fixes for v2026.01.27 Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-02 19:11 ` [PATCH 1/3] xfs/018: remove inline xattr recovery tests Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-03  5:22   ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2026-02-05 16:56     ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-05 17:19       ` Carlos Maiolino
2026-02-06  5:59       ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-06  6:22         ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-06  6:26           ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-06  6:27             ` Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-06 21:54   ` [PATCH v1.1 " Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-02 19:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] xfs/620: force xattr leaf format for this test Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-03  5:22   ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-05 17:15   ` Carlos Maiolino
2026-02-02 19:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] generic/749: don't write a ton of _mread output to seqres.full Darrick J. Wong
2026-02-03  5:23   ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-02-05 17:17   ` Carlos Maiolino

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aYGGHMfca4gbB2vy@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zlang@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox