From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.223.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3257B13AD25 for ; Wed, 15 May 2024 13:40:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715780444; cv=none; b=XhI2P0ploXoQiT2kkni2rDcYWq6p+n/bG//FYNLmVgjewh0YDw1C5j/wK7MlRdwsHbSTHrv5RDE1gHjpMckMgF2ID9by5UQmSCmcfRIiS5dbD8FUtSuer3gNRPrSvd44n9QKB4wo8xKDMCF+OogzwbqT/3pTew+304unQ6Yprno= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715780444; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LXHV+k0luFqx1OlitKKx+1HYfdXuTUZJmE5vMPNtxsA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=lQ/+phWYBibk94PSGmuiKR6aT4RIy3KMgqrOxCeLyY0vUKLTta6cQ45rB60dOBIfj0vUhVVv4rdQc4kE5d6zUgIfPxB+tbwhGyn1LJfXK6ksnwBbhgahP+wenSTl9NJ9zmTP60Pcn8IkzxmdxK2zbrWsD5ARfh/lZ8Cgxs5mzKM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=YVQgYek5; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=FSE1eyv6; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=YVQgYek5; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b=FSE1eyv6; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="YVQgYek5"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="FSE1eyv6"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="YVQgYek5"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=suse.cz header.i=@suse.cz header.b="FSE1eyv6" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (unknown [10.150.64.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2182720717; Wed, 15 May 2024 13:40:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1715780432; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VLGJev3FA7v3vsYQEjnEowkK3iUYOP0SL3+sW0TN5YI=; b=YVQgYek5HqXmJnE9tcJCykuLrzO9PN2sfMpFunCbmyVy/TxBLs/4EVrvMCA3Ho1MeeeUpn HcTxYXF61ir/CCnp7E7I52Jsfmeuw/XaTKfMIUNw9yvz2m0l9GHcnAO75p3ujoWNQI/bN5 LjlK2EbVHtE0z9KavwMByHNmZj8sCR8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1715780432; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VLGJev3FA7v3vsYQEjnEowkK3iUYOP0SL3+sW0TN5YI=; b=FSE1eyv6Hs3uvUmst4Re4bPPCHocjTNEe6AGCgx8EDcaBxl87s7i0IR/iW9BNScUWaLDj8 9ulRrg6UdfQZzpDA== Authentication-Results: smtp-out2.suse.de; none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1715780432; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VLGJev3FA7v3vsYQEjnEowkK3iUYOP0SL3+sW0TN5YI=; b=YVQgYek5HqXmJnE9tcJCykuLrzO9PN2sfMpFunCbmyVy/TxBLs/4EVrvMCA3Ho1MeeeUpn HcTxYXF61ir/CCnp7E7I52Jsfmeuw/XaTKfMIUNw9yvz2m0l9GHcnAO75p3ujoWNQI/bN5 LjlK2EbVHtE0z9KavwMByHNmZj8sCR8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1715780432; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VLGJev3FA7v3vsYQEjnEowkK3iUYOP0SL3+sW0TN5YI=; b=FSE1eyv6Hs3uvUmst4Re4bPPCHocjTNEe6AGCgx8EDcaBxl87s7i0IR/iW9BNScUWaLDj8 9ulRrg6UdfQZzpDA== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 531451372E; Wed, 15 May 2024 13:40:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id IP4XEE+7RGbuGwAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 15 May 2024 13:40:31 +0000 Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 15:40:25 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Lee Jones Cc: Murphy Zhou , ltp@lists.linux.it, Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" , Cyril Hrubis Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] readahead01: pass on pidfd Message-ID: <20240515134025.GA225100@pevik> Reply-To: Petr Vorel References: <20240423070643.38577-1-jencce.kernel@gmail.com> <20240515132151.GA557949@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@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: <20240515132151.GA557949@google.com> X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.00 X-Spam-Level: X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; SUSPICIOUS_RECIPS(1.50)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gmail.com,lists.linux.it,linux-foundation.org,kvack.org,vger.kernel.org,infradead.org,suse.cz]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo]; TAGGED_RCPT(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN(0.00)[8]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[] Hi Lee, > On Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Murphy Zhou wrote: > > Linux kernel added pidfs via commit b5683a37c881 in v6.9-rc1 > > release. This patchset ignores readahead request instead of > > returning EINVAL, so mark the test pass. > > https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2403.2/00762.html > > Signed-off-by: Murphy Zhou > > --- > > testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead01.c | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead01.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead01.c > > index d4b3f306f..aed8e7f31 100644 > > --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead01.c > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/readahead/readahead01.c > > @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ static void test_invalid_fd(struct tst_fd *fd) > > case TST_FD_MEMFD: > > case TST_FD_MEMFD_SECRET: > > case TST_FD_PROC_MAPS: > > + case TST_FD_PIDFD: > > return; > > default: > > break; > Any movement on this? Back to Christian Brauner discussing with Cyril Hrubis [1] > Wouldn't it make more sense to actually return EINVAL instead of > ignoring the request if readahead() is not implemented? It would change the return value for a whole bunch of stuff. I'm not sure that wouldn't cause regressions but is in any case a question for the readahead maintainers. For now I'd just remove that test for pidfds imho. That's why I would like to get ack / oppinion of the readahead maintainers. I already asked them under this patch. @Andrew gently ping. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240318-fegen-bezaubern-57b0a9c6f78b@brauner/ Below the patch I have asked kernel maintainers to ack if > Android pre-submit CI testing is failing due to the new unconditional > enable of PIDFD. I believe this patch is required in order to bring it > back to a passing state.