On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2025 at 11:31:24AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 11:54:15AM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > This allows the VFS to not trip over anonymous inodes and we can add > > > asserts based on the mode into the vfs. When we report it to userspace > > > we can simply hide the mode to avoid regressions. I've audited all > > > direct callers of alloc_anon_inode() and only secretmen overrides i_mode > > > and i_op inode operations but it already uses a regular file. > > > > We've been seeing failures in LTP's readadead01 in -next on arm64 > > platforms: > > This fscking readhead garbage is driving me insane. > Ok, readahead skipped anonymous inodes because it's checking whether it > is a regular file or not. We now make them regular files internally. > Should be fixed in -next tomorrow. Is this the readahead syscall? Yeah that random check in the high level code looks odd if that's what is being triggered here.
