From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Pedro Falcato <pedro.falcato@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] do_open(): Fix O_DIRECTORY | O_CREAT behavior
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 10:12:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230328081227.keyadx3gdymr7fzf@wittgenstein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKbZUD1N-jsrro_9ix12vNmjL0iUqqvicCv7MHyj19O5LJs1aQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 09:13:18PM +0100, Pedro Falcato wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 4:17 PM Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
> > It would be very nice if we had tests for the new behavior. So if @Pedro
> > would be up for it that would be highly appreciated. If not I'll put it
> > on my ToDo...
>
> Where do you want them? selftests? I have a relatively self-contained
> ""testsuite"" of namei stuff that could fit in there well, after some
> cleanup.
I think I would prefer to have them as part of xfstests:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git
as that's where nearly all of the fs testing is taking place. It's never
great when developers have to run 3 separate testsuites to get
meaningful coverage. So having it central to xfstests would be my
preference.
A while ago I added a testsuite that tests generic core VFS behavior
it's located under src/vfs:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/tree/src/vfs
and covers a lot of different things. So I would ask you to consider
adding a new testsuite into that file:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/fs/xfs/xfstests-dev.git/tree/src/vfs/vfstest.c
I think the structure should be somewhat understandable. Then create a
new test in xfstests using the "new" helper in the generic sectionA
> ./new generic
Next test id is 728
Append a name to the ID? Test name will be 728-$name. y,[n]:
Creating test file '728'
Add to group(s) [auto] (separate by space, ? for list): auto quick
Creating skeletal script for you to edit ...
then call the vfstest binary from the generated test case:
echo "Silence is golden"
$here/src/vfs/vfstest --test-THAT-NEW-SWITCH-NAME-YOU-ADDED --device "$TEST_DEV" \
--mount "$TEST_DIR" --fstype "$FSTYP"
status=$?
exit
(You can also submit this to LTP or tell them about this change and
they'll likely add tests in addition to xfstests.)
>
> > The expectation often is that this particular combination would create
> > and open a directory. This suggests users who tried to use that
> > combination would stumble upon the counterintuitive behavior no matter
> > if pre-v5.7 or post v5.7 and quickly realize neither semantics give them
> > what they want. For some examples see the code examples in [1] to [3]
> > and the discussion in [4].
>
> Ok so, silly question: Could it not be desirable to have these
> semantics (open a dir or mkdir, atomically)?
> It does seem to be why POSIX left this edge case implementation
> defined, and if folks are asking for it, could it be the right move?
>
> And yes, I do understand (from reading the room) that no one here is
> too excited about this possibility.
Forgive me for being lazy and instead of repeating everything I'll just
leave a link to the other part of the thread
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230328075735.d3rs27jjvarmn6dw@wittgenstein
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-28 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-20 7:14 [PATCH] do_open(): Fix O_DIRECTORY | O_CREAT behavior Pedro Falcato
2023-03-20 11:51 ` Christian Brauner
2023-03-20 17:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 19:27 ` Pedro Falcato
2023-03-20 20:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 22:10 ` Aleksa Sarai
2023-03-21 14:24 ` Christian Brauner
2023-03-21 16:17 ` Christian Brauner
2023-03-21 17:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-21 20:16 ` Christian Brauner
2023-03-21 21:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-22 10:17 ` Christian Brauner
2023-03-22 17:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-27 20:13 ` Pedro Falcato
2023-03-28 8:12 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2023-03-28 2:15 ` Josh Triplett
2023-03-28 3:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-28 4:00 ` Josh Triplett
2023-03-28 7:57 ` Christian Brauner
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=20230328081227.keyadx3gdymr7fzf@wittgenstein \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pedro.falcato@gmail.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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 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 NNTP newsgroup(s).