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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3595CC433EF for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:27:14 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E13B60F5B for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:27:13 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 8E13B60F5B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.linux.it Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E2563C8180 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:27:12 +0100 (CET) Received: from in-6.smtp.seeweb.it (in-6.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.6]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E98FB3C7FC2 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:26:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (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 453781400F4F for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:26:57 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78CD421923; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:26:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1636972017; 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=ZQFR/YqQEa5i1HI+2ocMAtRdPhQdNFKVvuSTWjn5CYI=; b=E/vKvjwIJDlO5oPVH7ddOywqPMJyo/OE1KN7e7ilDNSsnb67VaPrc28ktfRqGAQMRar/Hq /xpP2pkzYYKRDvbwqwVgtzPy2RqbXIfMGLP7b1YOSLQ+SyhzBujICUHEnHwDK9HNQ8mpcF SXxBw246xYM83VbNlVPt43uS4Qwg6Jw= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1636972017; 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=ZQFR/YqQEa5i1HI+2ocMAtRdPhQdNFKVvuSTWjn5CYI=; b=sJxYdHt2pZrqBifeIbqZVcefECDKPxP0fOj+YgzM+Io+tit2llKBcKGRBqC0IYjt0IK09/ Dot2bJHBHZj7C3Dw== Received: from g78 (unknown [10.163.24.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37BB4A3B87; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:26:57 +0000 (UTC) References: <1636619544-2369-1-git-send-email-xuyang2018.jy@fujitsu.com> <87a6i9ejdy.fsf@suse.de> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.9; emacs 27.2 From: Richard Palethorpe To: Cyril Hrubis Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:21:30 +0000 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87bl2ld89b.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-6.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v4] syscalls/statx04: use stx_attributes_mask before test 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: rpalethorpe@suse.de 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" Hello, Cyril Hrubis writes: > Hi! >> Note that even if you move setting the flags to the top. This will still >> result in all unset flags becoming TCONF instead of TFAIL. >> >> IMO statx is broken on older kernels except for ext4. It can be fixed by >> backporting patches. One of the main use cases for LTP is to find >> missing backports. > > That was my point as well. > > I guess that the last time I've proposed to create a separate test that > just tests that these flags are set as expected for a all filesystems > and that test would have the patches that fixed that as a tags set. That > would make it clearer what is wrong and what should be backported. > > Once we have that test implemented we can change this test as this patch > does. Or perhaps we could pass a flag to this test to ignore kernel versions which are known not to work? -- Thank you, Richard. -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp