All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Martijn Coenen <maco@android.com>
Cc: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.com>,
	linux-block <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
	<lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	LTP List <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] LTP: syscalls: regression on mainline - ioctl_loop01 mknod07 setns01
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 17:27:02 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5e992dc1-c60b-bfd0-a993-dfbd0572d499@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB0TPYE4yvunSmK=oK7goaCRa+B1BxAoVhEkK+yhtDNwnJS6VA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Martign

Also for your kernel commit,
lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags & ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags & ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_CLEARABLE_FLAGS;

since  ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS has been included in 
~LOOP_SET_STATUS_CLEARABLE_FLAGS, do we still need the previous step?
What do you think about it?

Best Regards
Yang Xu

> Hey Yang,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:59 AM Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Martijn
>>
>> Sorry for noise. I see your patch in here[1] . I will modify
>> ioctl_loop01 to test that LO_FLAGS_PARTSCAN can not clear and
>> LO_FLAGS_AUTOCLEAR can be clear.
> 
> Thanks, that would indeed be useful.
> 
>>
>> ps: Giving the url of patch is better so that other people doesn't need
>> to investigate it again.
>> [1]https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11588321/
> 
> Ok, will do next time!
> 
> Best,
> Martijn
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Yang Xu
>>> Hi Martijn
>>>
>>>> Hi Naresh,
>>>>
>>>> I just sent a patch and cc'd you. I verified all the loop tests pass
>>>> again with that patch.
>>> I think you want to say "without".  I verified the ioctl_loop01 fails
>>> with faf1d25440 ("loop: Clean up LOOP_SET_STATUS lo_flags handling").
>>>
>>> This kernel commit breaks old behaviour(if old flag all 0, new flag is
>>> always 0 regradless your flag setting).
>>>
>>> I think we should modify code as below:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
>>> index 13518ba191f5..c6ba8cf486ce 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
>>> @@ -1364,11 +1364,9 @@ loop_set_status(struct loop_device *lo, const
>>> struct loop_info64 *info)
>>>           if (err)
>>>                   goto out_unfreeze;
>>>
>>> -       /* Mask out flags that can't be set using LOOP_SET_STATUS. */
>>> -       lo->lo_flags &= ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
>>> -       /* For those flags, use the previous values instead */
>>> -       lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags & ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
>>> -       /* For flags that can't be cleared, use previous values too */
>>> +       /* Mask out flags that can be set using LOOP_SET_STATUS. */
>>> +       lo->lo_flags &= LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
>>> +       /* For flags that can't be cleared, use previous values. */
>>>           lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags &~LOOP_SET_STATUS_CLEARABLE_FLAGS;
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Yang Xu
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 9:10 PM Martijn Coenen <maco@android.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Naresh,
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect the loop failures are due to
>>>>> faf1d25440d6ad06d509dada4b6fe62fea844370 ("loop: Clean up
>>>>> LOOP_SET_STATUS lo_flags handling"), I will investigate and get back
>>>>> to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 7:19 PM Naresh Kamboju
>>>>> <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + linux-block@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 22:47, Naresh Kamboju
>>>>>> <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Following three test cases reported as regression on Linux mainline
>>>>>>> kernel
>>>>>>> on x86_64, arm64, arm and i386
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     ltp-syscalls-tests:
>>>>>>>       * ioctl_loop01
>>>>>>>       * mknod07
>>>>>>>       * setns01
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> git repo:
>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
>>>>>>> git branch: master
>>>>>>> GOOD:
>>>>>>>     git commit: b23c4771ff62de8ca9b5e4a2d64491b2fb6f8f69
>>>>>>>     git describe: v5.7-1230-gb23c4771ff62
>>>>>>> BAD:
>>>>>>>     git commit: 1ee08de1e234d95b5b4f866878b72fceb5372904
>>>>>>>     git describe: v5.7-3523-g1ee08de1e234
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> kernel-config:
>>>>>>> https://builds.tuxbuild.com/U3bU0dMA62OVHb4DvZIVuw/kernel.config
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are investigating these failures.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tst_test.c:906: CONF: btrfs driver not available
>>>>>>> tst_test.c:1246: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 15m 00s
>>>>>>> tst_device.c:88: INFO: Found free device 1 '/dev/loop1'
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:49: PASS: /sys/block/loop1/loop/partscan = 0
>>>>>>> [ 1073.639677] loop_set_status: loop1 () has still dirty pages
>>>>>>> (nrpages=1)
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:50: PASS: /sys/block/loop1/loop/autoclear = 0
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:51: PASS: /sys/block/loop1/loop/backing_file =
>>>>>>> '/scratch/ltp-mnIdulzriQ/9cPtLQ/test.img'
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:63: FAIL: expect 12 but got 17
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:67: FAIL: /sys/block/loop1/loop/partscan != 1 got 0
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:68: FAIL: /sys/block/loop1/loop/autoclear != 1 got 0
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:79: FAIL: access /dev/loop1p1 fails
>>>>>>> [ 1073.679678] loop_set_status: loop1 () has still dirty pages
>>>>>>> (nrpages=1)
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:85: FAIL: access /sys/block/loop1/loop1p1 fails
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HINT: You _MAY_ be missing kernel fixes, see:
>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=10c70d95c0f2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mke2fs 1.43.8 (1-Jan-2018)
>>>>>>> [ 1264.711379] EXT4-fs (loop0): mounting ext2 file system using the
>>>>>>> ext4 subsystem
>>>>>>> [ 1264.716642] EXT4-fs (loop0): mounted filesystem without journal.
>>>>>>> Opts: (null)
>>>>>>> mknod07     0  TINFO  :  Using test device LTP_DEV='/dev/loop0'
>>>>>>> mknod07     0  TINFO  :  Formatting /dev/loop0 with ext2 opts=''
>>>>>>> extra opts=''
>>>>>>> mknod07     1  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EACCES(13): Permission denied
>>>>>>> mknod07     2  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EACCES(13): Permission denied
>>>>>>> mknod07     3  TFAIL  :  mknod07.c:155: mknod succeeded unexpectedly
>>>>>>> mknod07     4  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
>>>>>>> mknod07     5  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EROFS(30): Read-only file system
>>>>>>> mknod07     6  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=ELOOP(40): Too many levels of symbolic links
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=ipc, ns_fds[0]=6,
>>>>>>> ns_types[0]=0x8000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=mnt, ns_fds[1]=7, ns_types[1]=0x20000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=net, ns_fds[2]=8,
>>>>>>> ns_types[2]=0x40000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=pid, ns_fds[3]=9,
>>>>>>> ns_types[3]=0x20000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=uts, ns_fds[4]=10,
>>>>>>> ns_types[4]=0x4000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x8000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     1  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x20000)
>>>>>>> setns01     2  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x40000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     3  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x20000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     4  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x4000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     5  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x8000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     6  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x20000)
>>>>>>> setns01     7  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x40000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     8  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x20000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     9  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x4000000)
>>>>>>> setns01    10  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Full test log link,
>>>>>>> https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1467931#L8047
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> test results comparison shows this test case started failing from
>>>>>>> June-2-2020
>>>>>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v5.7-4092-g38696e33e2bd/testrun/2779586/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/test/ioctl_loop01/history/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v5.7-4092-g38696e33e2bd/testrun/2779586/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/test/setns01/history/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v5.7-4092-g38696e33e2bd/testrun/2779586/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/test/mknod07/history/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Linaro LKFT
>>>>>>> https://lkft.linaro.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] LTP: syscalls: regression on mainline - ioctl_loop01 mknod07 setns01
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2020 17:27:02 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5e992dc1-c60b-bfd0-a993-dfbd0572d499@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB0TPYE4yvunSmK=oK7goaCRa+B1BxAoVhEkK+yhtDNwnJS6VA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Martign

Also for your kernel commit,
lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags & ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags & ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_CLEARABLE_FLAGS;

since  ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS has been included in 
~LOOP_SET_STATUS_CLEARABLE_FLAGS, do we still need the previous step?
What do you think about it?

Best Regards
Yang Xu

> Hey Yang,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:59 AM Yang Xu <xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Martijn
>>
>> Sorry for noise. I see your patch in here[1] . I will modify
>> ioctl_loop01 to test that LO_FLAGS_PARTSCAN can not clear and
>> LO_FLAGS_AUTOCLEAR can be clear.
> 
> Thanks, that would indeed be useful.
> 
>>
>> ps: Giving the url of patch is better so that other people doesn't need
>> to investigate it again.
>> [1]https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11588321/
> 
> Ok, will do next time!
> 
> Best,
> Martijn
>>
>> Best Regards
>> Yang Xu
>>> Hi Martijn
>>>
>>>> Hi Naresh,
>>>>
>>>> I just sent a patch and cc'd you. I verified all the loop tests pass
>>>> again with that patch.
>>> I think you want to say "without".  I verified the ioctl_loop01 fails
>>> with faf1d25440 ("loop: Clean up LOOP_SET_STATUS lo_flags handling").
>>>
>>> This kernel commit breaks old behaviour(if old flag all 0, new flag is
>>> always 0 regradless your flag setting).
>>>
>>> I think we should modify code as below:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
>>> index 13518ba191f5..c6ba8cf486ce 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
>>> @@ -1364,11 +1364,9 @@ loop_set_status(struct loop_device *lo, const
>>> struct loop_info64 *info)
>>>           if (err)
>>>                   goto out_unfreeze;
>>>
>>> -       /* Mask out flags that can't be set using LOOP_SET_STATUS. */
>>> -       lo->lo_flags &= ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
>>> -       /* For those flags, use the previous values instead */
>>> -       lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags & ~LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
>>> -       /* For flags that can't be cleared, use previous values too */
>>> +       /* Mask out flags that can be set using LOOP_SET_STATUS. */
>>> +       lo->lo_flags &= LOOP_SET_STATUS_SETTABLE_FLAGS;
>>> +       /* For flags that can't be cleared, use previous values. */
>>>           lo->lo_flags |= prev_lo_flags &~LOOP_SET_STATUS_CLEARABLE_FLAGS;
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>> Yang Xu
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 9:10 PM Martijn Coenen <maco@android.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Naresh,
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect the loop failures are due to
>>>>> faf1d25440d6ad06d509dada4b6fe62fea844370 ("loop: Clean up
>>>>> LOOP_SET_STATUS lo_flags handling"), I will investigate and get back
>>>>> to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 7:19 PM Naresh Kamboju
>>>>> <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> + linux-block@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 at 22:47, Naresh Kamboju
>>>>>> <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Following three test cases reported as regression on Linux mainline
>>>>>>> kernel
>>>>>>> on x86_64, arm64, arm and i386
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     ltp-syscalls-tests:
>>>>>>>       * ioctl_loop01
>>>>>>>       * mknod07
>>>>>>>       * setns01
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> git repo:
>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
>>>>>>> git branch: master
>>>>>>> GOOD:
>>>>>>>     git commit: b23c4771ff62de8ca9b5e4a2d64491b2fb6f8f69
>>>>>>>     git describe: v5.7-1230-gb23c4771ff62
>>>>>>> BAD:
>>>>>>>     git commit: 1ee08de1e234d95b5b4f866878b72fceb5372904
>>>>>>>     git describe: v5.7-3523-g1ee08de1e234
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> kernel-config:
>>>>>>> https://builds.tuxbuild.com/U3bU0dMA62OVHb4DvZIVuw/kernel.config
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are investigating these failures.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tst_test.c:906: CONF: btrfs driver not available
>>>>>>> tst_test.c:1246: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 15m 00s
>>>>>>> tst_device.c:88: INFO: Found free device 1 '/dev/loop1'
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:49: PASS: /sys/block/loop1/loop/partscan = 0
>>>>>>> [ 1073.639677] loop_set_status: loop1 () has still dirty pages
>>>>>>> (nrpages=1)
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:50: PASS: /sys/block/loop1/loop/autoclear = 0
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:51: PASS: /sys/block/loop1/loop/backing_file =
>>>>>>> '/scratch/ltp-mnIdulzriQ/9cPtLQ/test.img'
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:63: FAIL: expect 12 but got 17
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:67: FAIL: /sys/block/loop1/loop/partscan != 1 got 0
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:68: FAIL: /sys/block/loop1/loop/autoclear != 1 got 0
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:79: FAIL: access /dev/loop1p1 fails
>>>>>>> [ 1073.679678] loop_set_status: loop1 () has still dirty pages
>>>>>>> (nrpages=1)
>>>>>>> ioctl_loop01.c:85: FAIL: access /sys/block/loop1/loop1p1 fails
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HINT: You _MAY_ be missing kernel fixes, see:
>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=10c70d95c0f2
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mke2fs 1.43.8 (1-Jan-2018)
>>>>>>> [ 1264.711379] EXT4-fs (loop0): mounting ext2 file system using the
>>>>>>> ext4 subsystem
>>>>>>> [ 1264.716642] EXT4-fs (loop0): mounted filesystem without journal.
>>>>>>> Opts: (null)
>>>>>>> mknod07     0  TINFO  :  Using test device LTP_DEV='/dev/loop0'
>>>>>>> mknod07     0  TINFO  :  Formatting /dev/loop0 with ext2 opts=''
>>>>>>> extra opts=''
>>>>>>> mknod07     1  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EACCES(13): Permission denied
>>>>>>> mknod07     2  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EACCES(13): Permission denied
>>>>>>> mknod07     3  TFAIL  :  mknod07.c:155: mknod succeeded unexpectedly
>>>>>>> mknod07     4  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EPERM(1): Operation not permitted
>>>>>>> mknod07     5  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=EROFS(30): Read-only file system
>>>>>>> mknod07     6  TPASS  :  mknod failed as expected:
>>>>>>> TEST_ERRNO=ELOOP(40): Too many levels of symbolic links
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=ipc, ns_fds[0]=6,
>>>>>>> ns_types[0]=0x8000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=mnt, ns_fds[1]=7, ns_types[1]=0x20000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=net, ns_fds[2]=8,
>>>>>>> ns_types[2]=0x40000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=pid, ns_fds[3]=9,
>>>>>>> ns_types[3]=0x20000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  ns_name=uts, ns_fds[4]=10,
>>>>>>> ns_types[4]=0x4000000
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x8000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     1  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x20000)
>>>>>>> setns01     2  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x40000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     3  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x20000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     4  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(-1, 0x4000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     5  TPASS  :  invalid fd exp_errno=9
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x8000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     6  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x20000)
>>>>>>> setns01     7  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x40000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     8  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x20000000)
>>>>>>> setns01     9  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>> setns01     0  TINFO  :  setns(11, 0x4000000)
>>>>>>> setns01    10  TFAIL  :  setns01.c:176: regular file fd exp_errno=22:
>>>>>>> errno=EBADF(9): Bad file descriptor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Full test log link,
>>>>>>> https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1467931#L8047
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> test results comparison shows this test case started failing from
>>>>>>> June-2-2020
>>>>>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v5.7-4092-g38696e33e2bd/testrun/2779586/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/test/ioctl_loop01/history/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v5.7-4092-g38696e33e2bd/testrun/2779586/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/test/setns01/history/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://qa-reports.linaro.org/lkft/linux-mainline-oe/build/v5.7-4092-g38696e33e2bd/testrun/2779586/suite/ltp-syscalls-tests/test/mknod07/history/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Linaro LKFT
>>>>>>> https://lkft.linaro.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 



  reply	other threads:[~2020-06-05  9:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-04 17:17 LTP: syscalls: regression on mainline - ioctl_loop01 mknod07 setns01 Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-04 17:17 ` [LTP] " Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-04 17:19 ` Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-04 17:19   ` [LTP] " Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-04 19:10   ` Martijn Coenen
2020-06-04 19:10     ` [LTP] " Martijn Coenen
2020-06-04 20:27     ` Martijn Coenen
2020-06-04 20:27       ` [LTP] " Martijn Coenen
2020-06-05  8:21       ` Yang Xu
2020-06-05  8:21         ` [LTP] " Yang Xu
2020-06-05  8:59         ` Yang Xu
2020-06-05  8:59           ` Yang Xu
2020-06-05  9:11           ` Martijn Coenen
2020-06-05  9:11             ` Martijn Coenen
2020-06-05  9:27             ` Yang Xu [this message]
2020-06-05  9:27               ` Yang Xu
2020-06-05 11:31               ` Martijn Coenen
2020-06-05 11:31                 ` Martijn Coenen
2020-06-05  8:27 ` Jan Stancek
2020-06-05  8:27   ` [LTP] " Jan Stancek
2020-06-05 10:50   ` Naresh Kamboju
2020-06-05 10:50     ` [LTP] " Naresh Kamboju

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=5e992dc1-c60b-bfd0-a993-dfbd0572d499@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --to=xuyang2018.jy@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=maco@android.com \
    --cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
    --cc=rpalethorpe@suse.com \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.