[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZfRf36u7CH7bIEZ7@yuki>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 15:49:03 +0100
From: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...el.com, ltp@...ts.linux.it,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LTP] [linus:master] [pidfd] cb12fd8e0d: ltp.readahead01.fail
Hi!
> So I'd just remove that test. It's meaningless for pseudo fses.
Wouldn't it make more sense to actually return EINVAL instead of
ignoring the request if readahead() is not implemented?
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@...e.cz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists