* Re: [LTP] [PATCH 6.17 00/15] 6.17.1-rc1 review
2025-10-04 12:05 ` [LTP] [PATCH 6.17 00/15] 6.17.1-rc1 review Naresh Kamboju
@ 2025-10-04 15:52 ` Darrick J. Wong via ltp
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Darrick J. Wong via ltp @ 2025-10-04 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Naresh Kamboju
Cc: lkft-triage, linux-kernel, stable, Kalesh Singh, shuah,
Dan Carpenter, f.fainelli, hargar, jonathanh, Joanne Koong,
patches, linux, Miklos Szeredi, Arnd Bergmann, broonie,
Ben Copeland, LTP List, Juan Yescas, rwarsow, pavel, patches,
conor, achill, Greg Kroah-Hartman, akpm, torvalds,
sudipm.mukherjee
On Sat, Oct 04, 2025 at 05:35:44PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2025 at 21:37, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 6.17.1 release.
> > There are 15 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > let me know.
> >
> > Responses should be made by Sun, 05 Oct 2025 16:02:25 +0000.
> > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> >
> > The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> > https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/stable-review/patch-6.17.1-rc1.gz
> > or in the git tree and branch at:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-6.17.y
> > and the diffstat can be found below.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
>
>
> LTP syscalls swapon01, swapon02, swapon03, swapoff01 and swapoff02 test failing
> on 16K and 64K page arm64 devices and passed with default 4K page size.
>
> These failures are noticed on Linux next and mainline master (v6.17).
>
> This test failed on 16K page size builds and 64K page size builds.
> * CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES=y
> * CONFIG_ARM64_16K_PAGES=y
>
> Test regression: LTP swapon/off 16K and 64K page size LTP
> libswap.c:230: TFAIL: swapon() on fuse failed: EINVAL (22)
>
> Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>
>
> Anders, bisected this on the Linux next and found the,
> # first bad commit:
> [bd24d2108e9c8459d2c9f3d6d910b0053887df57]
> fuse: fix fuseblk i_blkbits for iomap partial writes
[now that this has come up twice I'm replying]
Yikes, you can do swap over FUSE? Ohhhh, that's why fuse implements
bmap in the aops.
The last I heard from Joanne, the workaround in that bd24d2108 commit
will go away when she lands iomap for read{,ahead} in 6.19. Not sure
what the solution is in the meantime.
I speculate that the problem here is that the superblock
s_blocksize_bits always gets reset to PAGE_SHIFT even if the fuse server
had set another value, and now there's a mismatch and the swapfile code
rejects?
<shrug> I dunno how much people care about swap over fuse, but it /is/ a
breaking change.
--D
> ## Test logs
> ### swapon01
>
> libswap.c:230: TFAIL: swapon() on fuse failed: EINVAL (22)
> swapon01.c:39: TINFO: create a swapfile size of 128 megabytes (MB)
> swapon01.c:25: TFAIL: tst_syscall(__NR_swapon, SWAP_FILE, 0) failed: EINVAL (22)
>
> Lore link,
> - https://lore.kernel.org/all/CA+G9fYtnXeG6oVrq+5v70sE2W7Wws_zcc63VaXZjy1b1O1S-FQ@mail.gmail.com/
>
> ## Build
> * kernel: 6.17.1-rc1
> * git: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git
> * git commit: e7da5b86b53db5f0fb8e2a4e0936eab2e6491ec7
> * git describe: v6.17-16-ge7da5b86b53d
> * test details:
> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-stable-rc-linux-6.17.y/build/v6.17-16-ge7da5b86b53d
>
> ## Test Regressions (compared to v6.17-16-ge7da5b86b53d)
> * qemu-arm64, ltp-syscalls
> - swapoff01
> - swapoff02
> - swapon01
> - swapon02
> - swapon03
>
> ## Metric Regressions (compared to v6.17-16-ge7da5b86b53d)
>
> ## Test Fixes (compared to v6.17-16-ge7da5b86b53d)
>
> ## Metric Fixes (compared to v6.17-16-ge7da5b86b53d)
>
> ## Test result summary
> total: 162823, pass: 136895, fail: 4815, skip: 21113, xfail: 0
>
> ## Build Summary
> * arc: 5 total, 5 passed, 0 failed
> * arm: 139 total, 138 passed, 1 failed
> * arm64: 57 total, 51 passed, 6 failed
> * i386: 18 total, 18 passed, 0 failed
> * mips: 34 total, 33 passed, 1 failed
> * parisc: 4 total, 4 passed, 0 failed
> * powerpc: 40 total, 39 passed, 1 failed
> * riscv: 25 total, 24 passed, 1 failed
> * s390: 22 total, 21 passed, 1 failed
> * sh: 5 total, 5 passed, 0 failed
> * sparc: 4 total, 3 passed, 1 failed
> * x86_64: 49 total, 46 passed, 3 failed
>
> ## Test suites summary
> * boot
> * commands
> * kselftest-arm64
> * kselftest-breakpoints
> * kselftest-capabilities
> * kselftest-cgroup
> * kselftest-clone3
> * kselftest-core
> * kselftest-cpu-hotplug
> * kselftest-cpufreq
> * kselftest-efivarfs
> * kselftest-exec
> * kselftest-fpu
> * kselftest-ftrace
> * kselftest-futex
> * kselftest-gpio
> * kselftest-intel_pstate
> * kselftest-ipc
> * kselftest-kcmp
> * kselftest-kvm
> * kselftest-livepatch
> * kselftest-membarrier
> * kselftest-memfd
> * kselftest-mincore
> * kselftest-mm
> * kselftest-mqueue
> * kselftest-net
> * kselftest-net-mptcp
> * kselftest-openat2
> * kselftest-ptrace
> * kselftest-rseq
> * kselftest-rtc
> * kselftest-rust
> * kselftest-seccomp
> * kselftest-sigaltstack
> * kselftest-size
> * kselftest-tc-testing
> * kselftest-timers
> * kselftest-tmpfs
> * kselftest-tpm2
> * kselftest-user_events
> * kselftest-vDSO
> * kselftest-x86
> * kunit
> * kvm-unit-tests
> * lava
> * libgpiod
> * libhugetlbfs
> * log-parser-boot
> * log-parser-build-clang
> * log-parser-build-gcc
> * log-parser-test
> * ltp-capability
> * ltp-commands
> * ltp-containers
> * ltp-controllers
> * ltp-cpuhotplug
> * ltp-crypto
> * ltp-cve
> * ltp-dio
> * ltp-fcntl-locktests
> * ltp-fs
> * ltp-fs_bind
> * ltp-fs_perms_simple
> * ltp-hugetlb
> * ltp-math
> * ltp-mm
> * ltp-nptl
> * ltp-pty
> * ltp-sched
> * ltp-smoke
> * ltp-syscalls
> * ltp-tracing
> * perf
> * rcutorture
> * rt-tests-cyclicdeadline
> * rt-tests-pi-stress
> * rt-tests-pmqtest
> * rt-tests-rt-migrate-test
> * rt-tests-signaltest
>
> --
> Linaro LKFT
> https://lkft.linaro.org
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread