From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (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 AF03C352FB8; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 09:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768556045; cv=none; b=TdZp/QLjlSxz9BqsCjSqKENpBtb3BCe56XDDGs+PIC8hxIAKTCwHd7bwDARS/MaSxq67TRiy+RDARMUAKwDnUDBedB36cPioJLNjwwSqqPS8EZxzlyIFoyUGqZ4/OpjZ1Z+enSgg/LCswlmcqv8hBN769+xRRtL5XLIL/Yf2IaM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768556045; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hbBhHFQaGDCtYfGm8vtthzbBv6AveA4kp+gJvRit+WA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=jdgV2PMzRxnMtp6E2X6QT+lS3veTdxf9x7qBpXUDeRyxZIZAo9fi1dw13WRcAo5rwqxZbI12Tyy5eJjwthAS7E0mg6lcXSko6+kc3Ru7sSlpwZqmCcYyXaRH0Auve76BjVc9PyIFyQ8361b3zWNHGi4/MVBOnNEH/RzFxeI8uCo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 492BA227AAF; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 10:33:51 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 10:33:48 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Namjae Jeon Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, tytso@mit.edu, willy@infradead.org, jack@suse.cz, djwong@kernel.org, josef@toxicpanda.com, sandeen@sandeen.net, rgoldwyn@suse.com, xiang@kernel.org, dsterba@suse.com, pali@kernel.org, ebiggers@kernel.org, neil@brown.name, amir73il@gmail.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, cheol.lee@lge.com, jay.sim@lge.com, gunho.lee@lge.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/14] ntfs filesystem remake Message-ID: <20260116093348.GA22781@lst.de> References: <20260111140345.3866-1-linkinjeon@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: <20260111140345.3866-1-linkinjeon@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 11:03:30PM +0900, Namjae Jeon wrote: > a. Pass more xfstests tests: > ntfs passed 308 tests, significantly higher than ntfs3's 235. > ntfs passed tests are a complete superset of the tests passed > by ntfs3. ntfs implement fallocate, idmapped mount and permission, > etc, resulting in a significantly high number of xfstests passing > compared to ntfs3. I'm not sure how many tests are actually run for the ntfs variants because they lack features needed for many tests, but how many still fail with this, because with these numbers I suspect there's quite a few left. Do you have any good grasp why they are failing, i.e. assumptions in xfsteasts, or missing feature checks? Also adding this here instead of for the various patches adding the code: there's a lot of problems with kerneldoc comments that make W=1 warns about. I think a lot of those are because comments are formatted as kerneldoc when they should not. Sparse also reports quite a lot of endianes/bitwise errors which need to be addressed.