All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
Cc: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com>,
	mtk manpages <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	guaneryu@gmail.com, ltp@lists.linux.it,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: utimensat EACCES vs. EPERM in 4.8+
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:39:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOssrKd32K-e5794m9KOjrMm_E3VZ7P-bvZW2P8UpGFTOgi8JQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170117075702.GB10417@rei.lan>

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> wrote:
> Hi!
>> > Jan, thanks for spotting this.
>>
>> Credit goes to Cyril. As for LTP-20170116 (released yesterday) we went
>> with current documented behavior - few failures are expected on 4.8+.
>
> Actually credit goes to SUSE QAM that caught the change on kernel
> update :-).

And while this makes for a nice discussion, it is almost completely
irrelevant in real life, since the only thing broken by this change
will be test suites (in other words immutable files are rare as hen's
teeth).

If you find that this change actually breaks something other than a
test suite, then yes, please lets revert it.  Otherwise there's not
much point (distros can revert it for themselves if they want be
paranoid).

Thanks,
Miklos

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jan Stancek <jstancek-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	mtk manpages
	<mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-fsdevel
	<linux-fsdevel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	viro <viro-RmSDqhL/yNMiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>,
	guaneryu-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
	ltp-cunTk1MwBs91InPhgRC9rw@public.gmane.org,
	Linux API <linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
	Dave Chinner <dchinner-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: utimensat EACCES vs. EPERM in 4.8+
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:39:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOssrKd32K-e5794m9KOjrMm_E3VZ7P-bvZW2P8UpGFTOgi8JQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170117075702.GB10417-2UyX9mZUyMU@public.gmane.org>

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Hi!
>> > Jan, thanks for spotting this.
>>
>> Credit goes to Cyril. As for LTP-20170116 (released yesterday) we went
>> with current documented behavior - few failures are expected on 4.8+.
>
> Actually credit goes to SUSE QAM that caught the change on kernel
> update :-).

And while this makes for a nice discussion, it is almost completely
irrelevant in real life, since the only thing broken by this change
will be test suites (in other words immutable files are rare as hen's
teeth).

If you find that this change actually breaks something other than a
test suite, then yes, please lets revert it.  Otherwise there's not
much point (distros can revert it for themselves if they want be
paranoid).

Thanks,
Miklos

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] utimensat EACCES vs. EPERM in 4.8+
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 10:39:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOssrKd32K-e5794m9KOjrMm_E3VZ7P-bvZW2P8UpGFTOgi8JQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170117075702.GB10417@rei.lan>

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz> wrote:
> Hi!
>> > Jan, thanks for spotting this.
>>
>> Credit goes to Cyril. As for LTP-20170116 (released yesterday) we went
>> with current documented behavior - few failures are expected on 4.8+.
>
> Actually credit goes to SUSE QAM that caught the change on kernel
> update :-).

And while this makes for a nice discussion, it is almost completely
irrelevant in real life, since the only thing broken by this change
will be test suites (in other words immutable files are rare as hen's
teeth).

If you find that this change actually breaks something other than a
test suite, then yes, please lets revert it.  Otherwise there's not
much point (distros can revert it for themselves if they want be
paranoid).

Thanks,
Miklos

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-17  9:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-16 15:46 utimensat EACCES vs. EPERM in 4.8+ Jan Stancek
2017-01-16 15:46 ` [LTP] " Jan Stancek
2017-01-16 15:53 ` Miklos Szeredi
2017-01-16 15:53   ` [LTP] " Miklos Szeredi
2017-01-17  0:04   ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-01-17  0:04     ` [LTP] " Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-17  4:50     ` Carlos O'Donell
2017-01-17  4:50       ` [LTP] " Carlos O'Donell
2017-01-17  4:50       ` Carlos O'Donell
2017-01-17  7:51     ` Jan Stancek
2017-01-17  7:51       ` [LTP] " Jan Stancek
2017-01-17  7:51       ` Jan Stancek
2017-01-17  7:57       ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-17  7:57         ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-17  9:39         ` Miklos Szeredi [this message]
2017-01-17  9:39           ` Miklos Szeredi
2017-01-17  9:39           ` Miklos Szeredi
2017-01-17 15:43           ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-17 15:43             ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-17 15:43             ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-18  8:23           ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-01-18  8:23             ` [LTP] " Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-18  8:23             ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-01-31 12:09             ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-31 12:09               ` [LTP] " Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-31 12:09               ` Cyril Hrubis
2017-01-17  4:41 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-01-17  4:41   ` [LTP] " Theodore Ts'o
2017-01-17 19:35   ` J. Bruce Fields
2017-01-17 19:35     ` [LTP] " J. Bruce Fields
2017-01-17 21:04     ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-01-17 21:04       ` [LTP] " Theodore Ts'o
2017-01-18  8:17       ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2017-01-18  8:17         ` [LTP] " Michael Kerrisk

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=CAOssrKd32K-e5794m9KOjrMm_E3VZ7P-bvZW2P8UpGFTOgi8JQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=mszeredi@redhat.com \
    --cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
    --cc=dchinner@redhat.com \
    --cc=guaneryu@gmail.com \
    --cc=jstancek@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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.