On Tue, 11 Jun 2024, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 5:30 AM NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 07 Jun 2024, James Clark wrote: > > > > > > Hi Neil, > > > > > > Now that your fix is in linux-next the statvfs01 test is passing again. > > > However inotify02 is still failing. > > > > > > This is because the test expects the IN_CREATE and IN_OPEN events to > > > come in that order after calling creat(), but now they are reversed. To > > > me it seems like it could be a test issue and the test should handle > > > them in either order? Or maybe there should be a single inotify event > > > with both flags set for the atomic open? > > > > Interesting.... I don't see how any filesystem that uses ->atomic_open > > would get these in the "right" order - and I do think IN_CREATE should > > come before IN_OPEN. > > Correct. > > > > > Does NFSv4 pass this test? > > Probably not. > > > > > IN_OPEN is generated (by fsnotify_open()) when finish_open() is called, > > which must be (and is) called by all atomic_open functions. > > IN_CREATE is generated (by fsnotify_create()) when open_last_lookups() > > detects that FMODE_CREATE was set and that happens *after* lookup_open() > > is called, which calls atomic_open(). > > > > For filesystems that don't use atomic_open, the IN_OPEN is generated by > > the call to do_open() which happens *after* open_last_lookups(), not > > inside it. > > Correct. > > > > > So the ltp test must already fail for NFSv4, 9p ceph fuse gfs2 ntfs3 > > overlayfs smb. > > > > inotify02 does not run on all_filesystems, only on the main test fs, > which is not very often one of the above. > > This is how I averted the problem in fanotify16 (which does run on > all_filesystems): > > commit 9062824a70b8da74aa5b1db08710d0018b48072e > Author: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue Nov 21 12:52:47 2023 +0200 > > fanotify16: Fix test failure on FUSE > > Split SAFE_CREAT() into explicit SAFE_MKNOD() and SAFE_OPEN(), > because with atomic open (e.g. fuse), SAFE_CREAT() generates FAN_OPEN > before FAN_CREATE (tested with ntfs-3g), which is inconsistent with > the order of events expected from other filesystems. > > inotify02 should be fixed similarly. Alternately - maybe the kernel should be fixed to always get the order right. I have a patch. I'll post it separately. Thanks for your confirmation that my understanding is correct! NeilBrown > > I did not find any other inotify test that watches IN_CREATE. > I did not find any other fanotify test that watches both FAN_CREATE > and FAN_OPEN. > > Thanks, > Amir. >
