Re: [LTP] [PATCH] fanotify25: fix test failure on kernel with CONFIG_MODULES=n

Amir Goldstein
2026-03-03T11:32:10Z

On Tue, Mar 3, 2026 at 11:50 AM Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz> wrote:
>
> On 3/3/26 11:10, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 3, 2026 at 10:59 AM Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz> wrote:
> >> I've written the test to test a specific fanotify regression. Tracing a
> >> syscall that gets called too often could increase system load and change
> >> timing of the race which I'm trying to trigger with it.
> >>
> >
> > Which fanotify regression?
> > As a reviewer, I got no indication in the commit message,
> > Test description, nor in LTP tst_test tags that this is a test for a regression.
> >
> > I have no objection whatsoever to using any other symbol available
> > in most of the common builds.
> > Alternatively, the test could test for the desired configuration.
> >
> > But if the test is meant to track a regression, then *please* document
> > the regression in the test description and the fix commit if such fix
> > exists in LTP tst_test tags.
>
> The regression in question was not in upstream but a broken backport in
> a custom kernel branch. It was fixed by reverting the backported patch.
> So while the test will be useful for detecting similar regressions in
> upstream, there is nothing I can publicly document about it.
>

Fair enough, but when choosing the function to trace, please
document the reason for choosing this function and document
the fact the expectation that this event will not be triggered during the
test or will not be triggered too frequently, whichever is the case.

Thanks,
Amir.