On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 1:48 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2025 at 12:07 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Jan, > > > > This v2 is following a two years leap from the RFC path [1]. > > the code is based on the mntns fix patches I posted and is available > > on my github [2]. > > > > Since then, Christian added support for open_by_handle_at(2) > > to admin inside userns, which makes watching FS_USERNS_MOUNT > > sb more useful. > > > > And this should also be useful for Miklos' mntns mount tree watch > > inside userns. > > > > Tested sb/mount watches inside userns manually with fsnotifywatch -S > > and -M with some changes to inotify-tools [3]. > > > > Ran mount-notify test manually inside userns and saw that it works > > after this change. > > > > I was going to write a variant of mount-notify selftest that clones > > also a userns, but did not get to it. > > > > Christian, Miklos, > > > > If you guys have interest and time in this work, it would be nice if > > you can help with this test variant or give me some pointers. > > > > I can work on the test and address review comments when I get back from > > vacation around rc5 time, but wanted to get this out soon for review. > > > > FWIW, this is my failed attempt to copy what statmount_test_ns does > to mount-notify_test_ns: > > https://github.com/amir73il/linux/commits/fanotify_selftests/ > Hi Jan, This selftests branch is now updated. The test is working as expected and verifies the changes in this patch set. Would you consider queuing the fanotify patches for v6.6? We need to collaborate the merge of the selftests with Christian because my selftests branch has some cleanups with a minor conflict with Christian's vfs/vfs-6.16.mount branch. Maybe you will carry only the fanotify patches to v6.6 and Christian will carry the tests in a separate branch? because the fanotify patches and the tests do not actually depend on each other to build, only for the test to pass. Thanks, Amir.
