From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08A4DC48292 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 18:43:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3591A3CF733 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 19:43:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D84FB3CC6CE for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 19:43:39 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: in-6.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2a07:de40:b251:101:10:150:64:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E35491400C40 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 19:43:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (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-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAC12220F4; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 18:43:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1707158617; 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=rlp2ujd/pHP6y7h7vH24rrlr6nRShAUxhnXfTU8WkAI=; b=0hWXrZBBTaz5M//gvpWqgPayDFxvC4x5viPDETpgaWHI5oRWAzH6JKUQFGtJqppSUbxbsN RnCJHWJYkK+z99qMggagX55vBpMr9sdmDkiGvyDmERr33e7z0iI1TC1o6QoYSJ4X9kWIxO iSlpA8nEqJuNEDWzbxWobKsdy+YKv24= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1707158617; 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=rlp2ujd/pHP6y7h7vH24rrlr6nRShAUxhnXfTU8WkAI=; b=XtuKXtA5KRt/HybOtOlq0j+hNKkfgVWx1KsiiCaLuk9THrpeU6tuyOiY7cGlbURQakRuhG x2edJzjS6omuynCw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1707158617; 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=rlp2ujd/pHP6y7h7vH24rrlr6nRShAUxhnXfTU8WkAI=; b=0hWXrZBBTaz5M//gvpWqgPayDFxvC4x5viPDETpgaWHI5oRWAzH6JKUQFGtJqppSUbxbsN RnCJHWJYkK+z99qMggagX55vBpMr9sdmDkiGvyDmERr33e7z0iI1TC1o6QoYSJ4X9kWIxO iSlpA8nEqJuNEDWzbxWobKsdy+YKv24= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1707158617; 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=rlp2ujd/pHP6y7h7vH24rrlr6nRShAUxhnXfTU8WkAI=; b=XtuKXtA5KRt/HybOtOlq0j+hNKkfgVWx1KsiiCaLuk9THrpeU6tuyOiY7cGlbURQakRuhG x2edJzjS6omuynCw== 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 532D5132DD; Mon, 5 Feb 2024 18:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([10.150.64.162]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id suTrA1kswWUTMgAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Mon, 05 Feb 2024 18:43:37 +0000 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 19:43:35 +0100 From: Petr Vorel To: Yang Xu Message-ID: <20240205184335.GB242730@pevik> References: <20231205061639.68656-3-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> <20231222050006.148845-1-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231222050006.148845-1-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=0hWXrZBB; dkim=pass header.d=suse.cz header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=XtuKXtA5 X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.34 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.30)[pvorel@suse.cz]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.cz:s=susede2_rsa,suse.cz:s=susede2_ed25519]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.cz:+]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.cz:dkim]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-0.83)[85.18%] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd1.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AAC12220F4 X-Spamd-Bar: / X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/7] libltpswap: Add get_maxswapfiles api X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Hi Yang Xu, I'm sorry, this is not applicable due my checkpatch cleanup, but it's Superseded anyway. @Yang Xu FYI I touched the same test swapon03.c [1]: The cleanup is not that much important (I'll rebase it after your changes), the second commit [2] is more important - failure on swapon03 on TMPDIR on tmpfs. I wonder if your MAX_SWAPFILES fixes will improve it. Kind regards, Petr [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?series=393561 [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/patch/20240205022857.191692-2-pvorel@suse.cz/ -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp