On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 05:31:39AM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > On 9/4/25 17:57, Zorro Lang wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 03:43:14PM +0800, Anand Jain wrote: > > > Ensure seqres is set early in run_section(). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anand Jain <anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > check | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/check b/check > > > index 32890470a020..16f695e9d75c 100755 > > > --- a/check > > > +++ b/check > > > @@ -804,6 +804,7 @@ function run_section() > > > seq="check.$$" > > > check="$RESULT_BASE/check" > > > + seqres="$check" > > > > The "seqres" even might be used earlier than that. If your rootfs is readonly, > > you'll see that. > > > > Zorro, > > Thanks a lot for the review and RVB! > > I’ll take care of this patch 2/6 in a separate patchset. > Meanwhile, could you help merge the rest of the sysfs patches, > except for patch 2/6? I don't want the seqres issue to block > the rest of the sysfs patches. OK, let's have the test coverage at first. You can merge this patchset without the 2/6 in your branch, (or use the way you did in https://lore.kernel.org/fstests/5e081252abdcf7253ad83d2b5eda49a8818305ad.1743996408.git.anand.jain@xxxxxxxxxx/ temporarily). Then send PR to me, I'll try to push this patchset in this week :) Thanks, Zorro > > Thanks, Anand > > > Thanks, > > Zorro > > > > > # don't leave old full output behind on a clean run > > > rm -f $check.full > > > @@ -849,7 +850,6 @@ function run_section() > > > fi > > > fi > > > - seqres="$check" > > > _check_test_fs > > > loop_status=() # track rerun-on-failure state > > > -- > > > 2.47.0 > > > > > >
