Re: [LTP] [PATCH 0/2] Improve ioprio tests

Petr Vorel
2023-06-20T10:42:52Z

> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:16:49AM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 11:13:16AM +0200, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > > Hi Damien,

> > > > The ioprio syscall tests rely on ltp internal definitions of the
> > > > IOPRIO_XXX() macro defining priority classes and levels. With changes
> > > > to the ioprio API to support command duration limits, these internal
> > > > definitions are incomplete, causing test case ioprio_set03 to fail.

> > > > Avoid this issue by having the iprio tests use the kernel header file
> > > > definitions if that header exists. This enables additional checks in
> > > > the header file [1] which restores the expected results with test
> > > > ioprio_set03.

> > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20230530061307.525644-1-dlemoal@kernel.org/

> > > > Note: a review of this patch on the kernel block mailing list would be
> > > > very appreciated.

> > > I haven't found this patchset on https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/,
> > > did you send it there?

> > Hello Petr,

> > The patch series for LTP can be found here:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/20230608005315.3703446-1-dlemoal@kernel.org/T/#t

> > I just checked LTP master, and it hasn't been applied by the
> > LTP maintainers yet.

> > Kind regards,
> > Niklas

> Oh, and in case you were referring to the prerequisite kernel patch,
> it is already in linux-next:

> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mkp/scsi.git/commit/?h=staging&id=01584c1e233740519d0e11aa20daa323d26bf598

Good to know, thank you (referring to kernel commits is always considered
useful).

No, I really searched if LTP patchset was also Cc'ed to linux-block.
But as the maintainers were Cc'ed I now understand why linux-block was omitted.
I'm sorry for the confusion.

Kind regards,
Petr

> So right now we are just waiting for the LTP patch series to get picked up.

> Kind regards,
> Niklas