On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 09:21:29PM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > On 2021-08-23, Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Baolin, > > > > On 8/22/21 8:40 PM, Baolin Wang wrote: > > > Hi Shuah, > > > > > > On 2021/7/28 20:32, Baolin Wang wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > When running the openat2 test suite on ARM64 platform, we got below failure, > > > > > since the definition of the O_LARGEFILE is different on ARM64. So we can > > > > > set the correct O_LARGEFILE definition on ARM64 to fix this issue. > > > > > > > > Sorry, I forgot to copy the failure log: > > > > > > > > Please cc everybody get_maintainers.pl suggests. You are missing > > key reviewers for this change. > > > > Adding Christian Brauner and Aleksa Sarai to the thread. > > > > > > # openat2 unexpectedly returned # 3['/lkp/benchmarks/kernel_selftests/tools/testing/selftests/openat2'] with 208000 (!= 208000) > > > > Not sure I understand this. 208000 (!= 208000) look sthe same to me. > > > > > > not ok 102 openat2 with incompatible flags (O_PATH | O_LARGEFILE) fails with -22 (Invalid argument) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Could you apply this patch if no objection from your side? Thanks. > > > > > > > Ideally this define should come from an include file. > > The issue is that O_LARGEFILE is set to 0 by glibc because glibc appears > to hide the nuts and bolts of largefile support from userspace. I > couldn't find a nice way of doing a architecture-dependent includes of > include/uapi from kselftests, so I just went with this instead -- but I > agree that a proper include would be better if someone can figure out > how to do it. I'd just add arch-dependent defines for now and call it good. So seems good enough for me: Thanks! Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Christian, Aleksa, > > > > Can you review this patch and let me know if this approach looks right. > > Reviewed-by: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@xxxxxxxxxx>
