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 4A38AC0502A for ; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:09:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E3BD3CA378 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2022 00:09:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-4.smtp.seeweb.it (in-4.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-384)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B44D83CA2E6 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2022 00:09:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [195.135.220.29]) (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-4.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0088100037E for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2022 00:09:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40DCC1F900; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:09:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1661551743; 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=kEIHuVe5htPig9Nu4OXIo3m7tnpV/vAo8UuUZKrtqUI=; b=JisLRtD2kUTRlhtIyrUuAZILXI8LOvgdL3EkYU/qqID0fycl535ujoy7oqPhXIYXY811P+ iSJBma36qvB9tt/spwrlw9pD3kZTffs0MaTI0eogBucIb8aBdEYfEX7sZeJb7XAFdinxvJ MYonpb7jGo3igK0KN1ibDcp0o+TxyTk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1661551743; 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=kEIHuVe5htPig9Nu4OXIo3m7tnpV/vAo8UuUZKrtqUI=; b=eAnacFSuLqlp3LJHBn7HXJZMWeO2De6+8VBqa1PxaCEz9nZUzdftMzgqoxKFMi88W2EQlJ fg6O1txijnRLAtCA== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F0D9C13A7E; Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:09:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id 5FfCOH5ECWPRXwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 26 Aug 2022 22:09:02 +0000 Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 00:09:01 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Amir Goldstein Message-ID: References: <20220825140306.7150-1-jack@suse.cz> <20220826141933.fiy7mohz4ca6s5se@quack3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-4.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] syscalls/fanotify10: Make evictable marks test more reliable 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: Matthew Bobrowski , Dominique Leuenberger , Jan Kara , LTP List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 5:19 PM Jan Kara wrote: > > On Fri 26-08-22 15:12:14, Petr Vorel wrote: > > > Hi Jan, all, > > > > In some setups evictable marks tests are failing because the inode with > > > > evictable mark does not get evicted. Make sure we sync the filesystem > > > > before we try to drop caches to increase likelyhood the inode will get > > > > evicted. > > > Merged with minor changes to keep checkpatch.pl happy. > > Thanks! > > > Given on previous discussion the behavior on ext2 vs. xfs: > > > would it make sense to transform the test to use .all_filesystems = 1 ? > On the contrary. > We want the inode reclaim to be as predictable as possible. > That is why I suggested to force the test to use ext2 > because xfs has some specialized inode reclaim Ah right! Could you please send a patch with .dev_fs_type = "ext2" That should be enough I guess. > > Well, I don't think it would improve test coverage in any interesting way. > > This test tests stuff in fsnotify layer & VFS. The differences in > > filesystem inode reclaim are not target of this test - we are just trying > > to check that fsnotify does not block inode reclaim by holding inode > > references and for that any filesystem works. Or did you mean something > > else? > Agree. I see no reason to change that. Thank you both for info! Kind regards, Petr > Thanks, > Amir. -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp