Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Sep 2021 11:03:57 +0800 | From | Oliver Sang <> | Subject | Re: [fs] f7e33bdbd6: ltp.ftruncate04_64.fail |
| |
Hi Jeff,
On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 06:32:38AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > On Wed, 2021-08-25 at 13:17 +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > Greeting, > > > > FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-9): > > > > commit: f7e33bdbd6d1bdf9c3df8bba5abcf3399f957ac3 ("fs: remove mandatory file locking support") > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/jlayton/linux.git locks-next > > > > > > in testcase: ltp > > version: ltp-x86_64-14c1f76-1_20210821 > > with following parameters: > > > > disk: 1HDD > > fs: ext4 > > test: syscalls-07 > > ucode: 0xe2 > > > > test-description: The LTP testsuite contains a collection of tools for testing the Linux kernel and related features. > > test-url: http://linux-test-project.github.io/ > > > > > > on test machine: 4 threads Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-6500 CPU @ 3.20GHz with 32G memory > > > > caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire log/backtrace): > > > > > > > > [...] > > > <<<test_start>>> > > tag=ftruncate04_64 stime=1629792639 > > cmdline="ftruncate04_64" > > contacts="" > > analysis=exit > > <<<test_output>>> > > tst_device.c:89: TINFO: Found free device 0 '/dev/loop0' > > tst_test.c:916: TINFO: Formatting /dev/loop0 with ext2 opts='' extra opts='' > > mke2fs 1.44.5 (15-Dec-2018) > > tst_test.c:1348: TINFO: Timeout per run is 0h 25m 00s > > ftruncate04.c:116: TINFO: Child locks file > > ftruncate04.c:49: TFAIL: ftruncate() offset before lock succeeded unexpectedly > > ftruncate04.c:49: TFAIL: ftruncate() offset in lock succeeded unexpectedly > > ftruncate04.c:84: TPASS: ftruncate() offset after lock succeded > > ftruncate04.c:127: TINFO: Child unlocks file > > ftruncate04.c:84: TPASS: ftruncate() offset in lock succeded > > ftruncate04.c:84: TPASS: ftruncate() offset before lock succeded > > ftruncate04.c:84: TPASS: ftruncate() offset after lock succeded > > > > Summary: > > passed 4 > > failed 2 > > broken 0 > > skipped 0 > > warnings 0 > > I think this failed because of the above, which is expected now that we > ignore the "mand" mount option (and mandatory locking support is gone). > > Oliver, you may need to update the expected test output for this test.
Thanks for the information! we will do the corresponding change ASAP
> > Thanks, > -- > Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> >
| |