> On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 08:39:10AM +0000, Xinjian Ma (Fujitsu) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 09:19:03PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 07:47:51AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 03:56:53PM +0800, Ma Xinjian wrote:
> > > > > > This test requires a kernel patch since 3bf963a6c6 ("xfs/348:
> > > > > > partially revert dbcc549317"), so note that in the test.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ma Xinjian <maxj.fnst@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > > tests/xfs/348 | 3 +++
> > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/tests/xfs/348 b/tests/xfs/348 index
> > > > > > 3502605c..e4bc1328 100755
> > > > > > --- a/tests/xfs/348
> > > > > > +++ b/tests/xfs/348
> > > > > > @@ -12,6 +12,9 @@
> > > > > > . ./common/preamble
> > > > > > _begin_fstest auto quick fuzzers repair
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +_fixed_by_git_commit kernel 38de567906d95 \
> > > > > > + "xfs: allow symlinks with short remote targets"
> > > > >
> > > > > Considering that 38de567906d95 is itself a fix for
> > > > > 1eb70f54c445f, do we want a _broken_by_git_commit to warn people
> > > > > not to apply 1eb70 without also applying 38de5?
> > > >
> > > > We already have _wants_xxxx_commit and _fixed_by_xxxx_commit, for
> > > > now, I don't think we need a new one. Maybe:
> > > >
> > > > _fixed_by_kernel_commit 38de567906d95 ..............
> > > > _wants_kernel_commit 1eb70f54c445f .............
> > > >
> > > > make sense? And use some comments to explain why 1eb70 is wanted?
> > >
> > > Oh! I didn't realize we had _wants_kernel_commit. Yeah, that's fine.
> >
> >
> > Hi Darrick
> >
> > Sorry, I still don't quite understand your intention.
> > Considering that 38de567906d95 is a fix for 1eb70f54c445f, I think the current
> xfs/348 test should have the following 3 situations:
> > 1. Neither 1eb70f54c445f nor 38de567906d95 are applied in the kernel:
> > xfs/348 passes 2. Only 1eb70f54c445f is applied in the kernel without
> > 38de567906d95: xfs/348 fails 3. Both 1eb70f54c445f and 1eb70f54c445f
> > are applied in the kernel: xfs/348 passes The situation of " Only
> 38de567906d95 is applied in the kernel without 1eb70f54c445f " should not
> exist.
> >
> > Since only the second case fails, I think it's sufficient to just point out that
> 38de567906d95 might be missing using "_fixed_by_kernel_commit ".
> > If my understanding is wrong, feel free to correct me, thank you very much.
>
> 1eb70f54c445f was a bugfix for a null pointer dereference due to insufficient
> validation, so we really /do/ want to nudge kernel distributors to add it (and
> 38de567906d95) to their kernels if they don't have either.
>
> But I see your point that xfs/348 will pass without either applied, so that's not
> much of a nudge. In the end, I'd rather this went in with annotations for both
> commits, but if Zorro decides that only noting
> 38de567906d95 is ok, then I'll go along with that too.
Hi Darrick
Thank you for the explanation. I understand your considerations now.
Sorry, I only considered whether xfs/348 passed.
I have submitted [PATCH v2] xfs/348: add helper tags. PTAL.
Best regards
Ma
>
> --D
>
> > Best regards
> > Ma
> > >
> > > --D
> > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Zorro
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --D
> > > > >
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > # Import common functions.
> > > > > > . ./common/filter
> > > > > > . ./common/repair
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 2.42.0
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
