on 2021/11/5 4:10, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote: > Hi Jan and Yang, > > On 11/4/21 11:53, Jan Kara wrote: >> On Thu 04-11-21 00:58:02, xuyang2018.jy@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>>>>> This patch[1] is designed to fix bug for Q_XQUOTARM ioctl not for >>>>>>>> introduced. >>>>>>>> So remove it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1]https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=9da93f9b7c >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xu<xuyang2018.jy@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> man2/quotactl.2 | 3 +-- >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/man2/quotactl.2 b/man2/quotactl.2 >>>>>>>> index d22d8c584..46f77a8b1 100644 >>>>>>>> --- a/man2/quotactl.2 >>>>>>>> +++ b/man2/quotactl.2 >>>>>>>> @@ -651,8 +651,7 @@ The >>>>>>>> .I id >>>>>>>> argument is ignored. >>>>>>>> .TP >>>>>>>> -.B Q_XQUOTARM " (since Linux 3.16)" >>>>>>>> -.\" 9da93f9b7cdf8ab28da6b364cdc1fafc8670b4dc > > I applied the patch. Thanks. >>>> >>>> Okay. Since you added that line (man-pages commit ae848b1d80), I'm fine >>>> removing it. Was it a mistake? The commit message of that commit is a >>>> bit unrelated to Q_XQUOTARM, isn't it? >>> Yes. >> >> Well, that commit fixed Q_XQUOTARM quotactl. Previously it was supported >> but it was buggy and not actually doing the desired functionality in some >> cases. So the description kind of make sense but it is not quite >> accurate - >> maybe we should just move the note to NOTES section? > > I think we better add a BUGS section. Don't you? > Unless you think it isn't important enough. How likely is it that > Q_XQUOTARM was used in kernels before 3.16 and a BUGS section will help > fix the bug? And how likely is it that someone will use it in the future > for kernels before 3.16? How important/dangerous was the bug? @Jan I doubt this ioctl whether be used by any application. ps:I also increase ltp quotactl coverage to cover quotactl_fd syscall. I would appreciate it if you could review my ltp quotactl/quotactl_fd patchset https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?series=269166 > > Maybe add something simpler such as "(buggy until Linux 3.16)" so that > no one uses it in older kernels but doesn't use as much space as a new > BUGS section? @Alejandro If this ioctl doesn't be used by many application(IMO,it is rare to be used ), using "(buggy until Linux 3.16)" is better. Best Regards Yang Xu > >> >>>> Maybe a better fix would be to replace the kernel version and the >>>> commit >>>> hash when it was really added? >>> Yes, but I can't find this commit hash and it seems been supported since >>> long time ago. >> >> Yeah, AFAIK Q_XQUOTARM is there in principle since XFS was introduced in >> the linux kernel so around 2001. No point of mentioning that in the >> manpage >> IMO. >> >> Honza >> > > Thanks, > > Alex > >
