[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 15:10:26 +0100
From: Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc: Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>,
Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>,
kernel@...labora.com, Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@...gle.com>,
Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@...gle.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>, Ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/9] Test the new fanotify FAN_FS_ERROR event
On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 2:49 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 5:16 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > v5.16 released => patchset merged.
> > Thanks!
> >
>
> Guys,
>
> Looks like we have a regression.
agreed, "abort" option stopped working:
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-tests/-/issues/945
Lukas pointed out this patch that didn't make it in yet:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/12/21/384
This should be new version:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/YcSYvk5DdGjjB9q%2F@mit.edu/T/#t
> With kernel v5.17-rc1, test fanotify22 blocks on the first test case,
> because the expected ECORRUPTED event on remount,abort is never received.
> The multiple error test cases also fail for the same reason.
>
> Gabriel,
>
> Are you aware of any ext4 change that could explain this regression?
>
> In any case, Petr, I suggest adding a short timeout to the test
> instead of the default 5min.
> Test takes less than 1 second on my VM on v5.16, so...
>
> Thanks,
> Amir.
>
> --
> Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists