Re: [PATCH 2/3] generic: introduce test to test file_getattr/file_setattr syscalls

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 08:18:24PM +0200, Andrey Albershteyn wrote:
> On 2025-08-12 01:55:41, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 09:31:57PM +0200, Andrey Albershteyn wrote:
> > > Add a test to test basic functionality of file_getattr() and
> > > file_setattr() syscalls. Most of the work is done in file_attr
> > > utility.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  tests/generic/2000     | 113 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  tests/generic/2000.out |  37 ++++++++++++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 150 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/tests/generic/2000 b/tests/generic/2000
> > > new file mode 100755
> > > index 000000000000..b4410628c241
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/tests/generic/2000
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
> > > +#! /bin/bash
> > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +# Copyright (c) 2025 Red Hat Inc.  All Rights Reserved.
> > > +#
> > > +# FS QA Test No. 2000
> > > +#
> > > +# Test file_getattr/file_setattr syscalls
> > > +#
> > > +. ./common/preamble
> > > +_begin_fstest auto
> > > +
> > > +# Import common functions.
> > > +# . ./common/filter
> > > +
> > > +_wants_kernel_commit xxxxxxxxxxx \
> > > +	"fs: introduce file_getattr and file_setattr syscalls"
> > 
> > As this's a new feature test, I'm wondering if we should use a _require_
> > function to check if current kernel and FSTYP supports file_set/getattr
> > syscalls, and _notrun if it's not supported, rather than fail the test.
> 
> hmm, I don't see where _require_function is defined

There's not that _require_ function, you need to write a new one to check
if current kernel and FSTYP supports file_set/getattr syscalls:) e.g. name
as _require_file_setattr.

You can use your src/file_attr to check that, or update src/feature.c for that.
refer to _require_aio or _require_scratch_shutdown.

> 
> Anyway, the _notrun makes more sense, I will look into what to check
> for to skip this one if it's not supported
> 
> -- 
> - Andrey
> 





[Index of Archives]     [XFS Filesystem Development (older mail)]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux