From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (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 F13172AEFD for ; Sun, 22 Jun 2025 21:51:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750629104; cv=none; b=jU8PUnR98qc5KoHllE604i8Qu+9c1taQ6eg1+CrQdqKBTY+/Y0RHFqJoHf9d93/0BQ+CsKRx98v++CGgpokLzZnmuWeV25col7HqAb//e4KBaYJXP1V8Id3dgN2uMypjC9Px2XKwQg7d4cBmBM1m6FsBcDp1p4UaYna9Rt4PtcE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750629104; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WjwI8pTi1rtycTgLJqnpOrsQYa6C7vMLshzK41jAYng=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition; b=DzMRvmekU+1buobXWr8DoYspXZRe8xW8VSgQ6GX9aw9bp74DeWzrKFbLgHGkiUMowp9Itk8Im3Wzji3RWX6PLV+9P2rZzSCRfa94UHHeaEiz5Qz3rTMBfoShRZHx78KHH2DmrHf5K2uFFGFVPqE42xNERP5PkGH1Qdfbumi8wdg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=K+Us3lUU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="K+Us3lUU" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:In-Reply-To:References; bh=9JBeOs7ibWufFvJU0XCdltpEV+8nK6qVuajfwxyjDXI=; b=K+Us3lUUdtTnxrotL7zqTGwIti iHHxU1TiOv+mXHPZtNWLGPyJUNTppr71ao5MnsaSmXPQiluVevE90ABNfrbPbaC30K1taeQ7uLUd/ PkyvUUFJIIo65KuYgDAdXCgrcHFKPVfi2vxWR6QByKTum9uycKoHweR9kLSfCfOO42XaWBnWQRbSm +pe4Yiei6TRWeG56egUdG9PmLbvzyAGoLPds7zJBPq67GFKDCTjZbLm31rs+L61MYxmEYIb5P0ti0 EgPxbCBsakK0K1OOQfHEWaD5r5fvpeqWBv5YgLqzc0bwtZGv782FvID/BMtVWVOuKv+WxvXd0BIie pL0q0yqw==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uTSbE-000000009PM-0Ldy; Sun, 22 Jun 2025 21:51:40 +0000 Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2025 22:51:40 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Amir Goldstein Cc: Eric Biggers , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: interesting breakage in ltp fanotify10 Message-ID: <20250622215140.GX1880847@ZenIV> 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 Sender: Al Viro LTP 6763a3650734 "syscalls/fanotify10: Add test cases for evictable ignore mark" has an interesting effect on boxen where FANOTIFY is not enabled. The thing is, tst_brk() ends up calling ->cleanup(). See the problem? SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(CACHE_PRESSURE_FILE, "%d", old_cache_pressure); is executed, even though SAFE_FILE_SCANF(CACHE_PRESSURE_FILE, "%d", &old_cache_pressure); /* Set high priority for evicting inodes */ SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(CACHE_PRESSURE_FILE, "500"); hadn't been. Result: fanotify10 on such kernel configs ends up zeroing /proc/sys/vm/vfs_cache_pressure. How much does it confuse the rest of LTP is an interesting question; it *does* have a fun effect on subsequent xfstests run - generic/622 gets confused. No other failures get reported by xfstests, for whatever little it's worth... Arguably, there's an xfstests bug as well - since generic/622 depends upon vfs_cache_pressure being non-zero, it ought to set it to something sane.