Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 2:22 PM Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Tue 26-10-21 12:12:38, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 10:27 PM Gabriel Krisman Bertazi >> > <krisman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > This is the 9th version of this patch series. Thank you, Amir, Jan and >> > > Ted, for the feedback in the previous versions. >> > > >> > > The main difference in this version is that the pool is no longer >> > > resizeable nor limited in number of marks, even though we only >> > > pre-allocate 32 slots. In addition, ext4 was modified to always return >> > > non-zero errno, and the documentation was fixed accordingly (No longer >> > > suggests we return EXT4_ERR* values. >> > > >> > > I also droped the Reviewed-by tags from the ext4 patch, due to the >> > > changes above. >> > > >> > > Please let me know what you think. >> > > >> > >> > All good on my end. >> > I've made a couple of minor comments that >> > could be addressed on commit if no other issues are found. >> >> All good on my end as well. I've applied all the minor updates, tested the >> result and pushed it out to fsnotify branch of my tree. WRT to your new >> FS_ERROR LTP tests, I've noticed that the testcases 1 and 3 from test >> fanotify20 fail for me. After a bit of debugging this seems to be a bug in >> ext4 where it calls ext4_abort() with EXT4_ERR_ESHUTDOWN instead of plain >> ESHUTDOWN. Not sure if you have that fixed or how come the tests passed for >> you. After fixing that ext4 bug everything passes for me. >> > > Gabriel mentioned that bug in the cover letter of the LTP series :-) > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/20211026173302.84000-1-krisman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u Yes :) Also, thank you both for the extensive review and ideas during the development of this series. It was really appreciated! I'm sending out the new version for tests + man pages today. -- Gabriel Krisman Bertazi
