From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 2D121332EAD; Wed, 27 May 2026 06:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779863109; cv=none; b=XtSsKJ0pMFH3w8wagZ3ZK5WVJt4fqAet0xppMFlMVS7QenIovqDCUpv68sacNhqWrp0yMj8t/rGPjLqo5fXev0iqvMacEeKjcrNyiT7dW6Bpe3i9PvTpcZH2Y3TDWYDloPq2GGwi0CA4kDKzmeMuBaN28b1Bi2wIL/6p+EPFpq4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779863109; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZxeJLlGn5aO/kyfFqEzoZLTI9QlJr1Yhd++wA9Y+RCw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=UglFuw+1kbSefCfyxp+BeT9WJHu74nhD+liFv2s5v4yKTZf0MAmJGUL75BlCD55gjLIBv+inixH1JV3uBUGCrNMYEKDKQA2sx0mlFwflNy9MdYKOFrEeVgQlhkAKCUUlxV3dkb9qmn+I/yE1lnn5RzDG2IhlFL9keCy5UIHanVI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=fuzG/lK1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=bombadil.srs.infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="fuzG/lK1" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=OAAGMpOHkvpR6JqIKq8ItSKMxQrT3swZgbt8CgOONp0=; b=fuzG/lK10HUfZyU6J+M8YmXoSX a+2yeQejhqPm6tYGfP4pbUkZmB/FlJ/IuHE8JXQWqCLBkWd7Qyc9FAU/03vzLojax899iDAbT8oYZ 71krcRgwhSXwQCh20TmcFmdX+w5GtjYOkjfuL1ZWUYM7yl0EJdajOL/ptfjgz4RsSHgjuWzSU9Uzg XdrB6V2cBUfRE5E4Pj/GiXXWsoBOdKUCuYONM+SOFWmpSHlmF4v5Co7w0sFgJadO+CRgOIV++s0+T U5x4dlTkkyjM63o8N6gPICwNVkJvotDc8X7VVj0qP7nQwjIFyIp/awCrYS/sPim0bMjjBeNaqoqUm MgEJO28A==; Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wS7hM-00000003Oes-3Hw9; Wed, 27 May 2026 06:25:00 +0000 Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 23:25:00 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Anand Jain Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Anand Jain , fstests@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, amir73il@gmail.com, zlang@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/10] fstests: add test for inotify isolation on cloned devices Message-ID: References: <1c60be06ce79778404079c8b1c1d2e09f64cb38e.1779367627.git.asj@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-ext4@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: X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 11:19:30PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > fanotity and inotify use exactly the same backends, so I'm not sure > > why testing both matters. > > I noticed that back then I decided to keep both. > Since fsnotifywait -F is only supported from kernel 5.1x. > inotifywait serves the legacy LTS kernels where required. < 5.1x is pretty old these days, I would not add test just for that. > > Not that I care very strongly, I'm just a > > bit confused. > > I am happy dropping inotifywait if unnecessary and confusing. Not a major issue, but it felt weird.