[LTP] LTP release status

[Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Cyril Hrubis" <chrubis@suse.cz>
> To: "Jan Stancek" <jstancek@redhat.com>
> Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
> Sent: Monday, 16 January, 2017 2:30:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [LTP] LTP release status
> 
> Hi!
> > > So I guess I should tag the git and write the release notes once you
> > > push your patches, okay?
> > 
> > Fine by me. I'm going to look at pushing those 2 patches.
> 
> And I've just stumbled over:
> 
> commit 8cc1e10d725c9104c0fc2a31527be8b1d9baa252
> Author: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
> Date:   Thu Sep 1 11:06:13 2016 +0200
> 
>     utimensat: fix immutable file retcodes for 4.8.0 and newer.
> 
>     Kernel 4.8.0 contains patch "337684a fs: return EPERM on immutable inode"
>     that
>     makes operations on immutable files return EPERM instead of EACCESS.
> 
>     Adjust utimensat test to check new retcode for kernels 4.8.0 and newer.
> 
>     Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
>     Reviewed-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>
> 
> 
> Looking closely at the manual page it explicitly says that immutable file
> with
> NULL times must return EACCESS. So as far as I can tell this either hides a
> kernel bug or the manual page is wrong. We may want to revert this for the
> release, what do you think?

I'm thinking revert until we figure out which one is correct. I checked man-pages
mailing list, but I don't see any patches for utimensat.

@Eryu: kernel commit 337684a mentions setxattr03, do you recall if it changed
also utimensat errno code on purpose? We seem to have a conflict with man
page at the moment.

Regards,
Jan

> 
> --
> Cyril Hrubis
> chrubis@suse.cz
>