On 2/13/25 10:02 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 09:17:28PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 2/13/25 2:50 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> On 2/13/25 1:51 PM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: >> >> ... >> >>>>> +rm -f $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq >>>>> +$XFS_IO_PROG -f -c "pwrite 0 0" $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq >>>>> +test -f $TEST_DIR/testfile.$seq || _fail "file not created" >>>> >>>> When does the file not get created? >>> >>> In some unknown error case? ;) >>> There's probably no reason for that test, though of course >>> it's still expected to pass. >>> >>> In the various discussions of the exfat bug scattered around >>> the internet people kept pointing out that "well, the file does >>> get created" so I probably had that on my mind. >> >> To put a finer point on it, because I can't tell for sure - are >> you asking me to take that test out? > > Nah, I was just wondering if there was something about the buggy exfat > code that either prevented the file from being created, or if the bug > was that the empty file got deleted after the zero-byte pwrite and I > misunderstood what's going on. Ah, I see. No, the observable problem was an -EFAULT on the write, and the file /does/ get created as expected. The test probably is extraneous to the original bug, because of course open(O_CREAT) and write(0) are two separate operations. I was just a bit over-eager when writing the test. Thanks, -Eric > (IOWs I think this test is fine, but could the exfat maintainer > clarify?) > > --D > >> Thanks, >> -Eric >> >> >
