From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
To: Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org, fstests@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] overlay/026: Fix test expectation for newer kernels
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 21:01:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxgyvsWXYMLpb_PcMTyjGSy1UtJUx6Wke+P-UHhrKd6zmQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231204175233.vo227ejohm5z55ol@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com>
On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 7:52 PM Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 07:09:08PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 4, 2023 at 6:58 PM Zorro Lang <zlang@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 05:20:13PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > > From: Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>
> > > >
> > > > The test checks the expectaion from old kernels that set/get of
> > > > trusted.overlay.* xattrs is not supported on an overlayfs filesystem.
> > > >
> > > > New kernels support set/get xattr of trusted.overlay.* xattrs, so adapt
> > > > the test to check that either both set and get work on new kernel, or
> > > > neither work on old kernel.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Larsson <alexl@redhat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Zorro,
> > > >
> > > > Per your request on v1 [1], I've added a helper to check escaped overlay
> > > > xattrs support.
> > > >
> > > > The helper was taken from the patch that adds test overlay/084 [2], and
> > > > re-factored, but other than that, overlay/084 itself is unchanged, so
> > > > I am not re-posting it nor any of the other patches in the overlay tests
> > > > for v6.7-rc1.
> > > >
> > > > Let me know if this works for you.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Amir.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20231116075250.ntopaswush4sn2qf@dell-per750-06-vm-08.rhts.eng.pek2.redhat.com/
> > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20231114064857.1666718-2-amir73il@gmail.com/
> > > >
> > > > common/overlay | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > tests/overlay/026 | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > > > tests/overlay/026.out | 2 --
> > > > 3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/common/overlay b/common/overlay
> > > > index 7004187f..8f275228 100644
> > > > --- a/common/overlay
> > > > +++ b/common/overlay
> > > > @@ -201,6 +201,25 @@ _require_scratch_overlay_features()
> > > > _scratch_unmount
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +_check_scratch_overlay_xattr_escapes()
> > > > +{
> > > > + local testfile=$1
> > > > +
> > > > + touch $testfile
> > > > + ! ($GETFATTR_PROG -n trusted.overlay.foo $testfile 2>&1 | grep -E -q "not (permitted|supported)")
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +_require_scratch_overlay_xattr_escapes()
> > > > +{
> > > > + _scratch_mkfs > /dev/null 2>&1
> > > > + _scratch_mount
> > > > +
> > > > + _check_scratch_overlay_xattr_escapes $SCRATCH_MNT/file || \
> > > > + _notrun "xattr escaping is not supported by overlay"
> > > > +
> > > > + _scratch_unmount
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Hi Amir,
> > >
> > > Sorry for this late review, got a little busy on other things recently.
> > > Won't this patch be conflict with another patchset which you/Alex have sent:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/20231114064857.1666718-2-amir73il@gmail.com/
> > >
> > > So you'll rebase that patchset on this, right?
> >
> > I rebased and pushed to this branch:
> > https://github.com/amir73il/xfstests/commits/overlayfs-devel
> >
> > If you want I can re-post the entire series, but really, the only change is
> > the common/overlay chunk in the first patch which should be ignored.
>
> Hi Amir,
>
> I just tried, there're two _require_scratch_overlay_xattr_escapes() in
> common/overlay [1].
Yes, as I said, the one from *this* patch is the correct one
the other one is obsolete.
> So please rebase and re-send that patchset, then I can
> merge them easily and clearly.
Ok. Sent v2.
You should apply it on top of this patch.
Thanks,
Amir.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-04 19:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-22 15:20 [PATCH v2] overlay/026: Fix test expectation for newer kernels Amir Goldstein
2023-12-04 14:30 ` Amir Goldstein
2023-12-04 16:58 ` Zorro Lang
2023-12-04 17:09 ` Amir Goldstein
2023-12-04 17:52 ` Zorro Lang
2023-12-04 19:01 ` Amir Goldstein [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAOQ4uxgyvsWXYMLpb_PcMTyjGSy1UtJUx6Wke+P-UHhrKd6zmQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=amir73il@gmail.com \
--cc=alexl@redhat.com \
--cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-unionfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=zlang@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).