> > LTP tests for this feature are on my 'fanotify-exec' branch here: > > https://github.com/matthewbobrowski/ltp/commits/fanotify_exec. The files > > that contains the test cases are provided below: > > > > syscalls/fanotify03: test cases have been updated to cover > > FAN_OPEN_EXEC_PERM events > > syscalls/fanotify12: newly introduced LTP test file to cover > > FAN_OPEN_EXEC events > > I have been wondering for a while why the testcases passed when ignore mask > hasn't been properly treated in fanotify_group_event_mask() but then I > realized that the generic code will not even call to fanotify if ignore > masks result in clearing the event. So does that means we have missing test coverage? I think the idea of this patch was that FAN_MARK_INODE, FAN_OPEN | FAN_OPEN_EXEC + FAN_MARK_MOUNT, FAN_MARK_IGNORED_MASK | FAN_OPEN_EXEC Will result with event with mask FAN_OPEN without FAN_OPEN_EXEC in spite the implementation of patch 2/4 using mask |= FS_OPEN_EXEC. No? Thanks, Amir.
