Amir Goldstein amir73il@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 10:06 AM Ajay Kaher ajay.kaher@broadcom.com wrote:
Without 9709bd548f11 in v5.10.y skips LTP fanotify22 test case, as: fanotify22.c:312: TCONF: FAN_FS_ERROR not supported in kernel
With 9709bd548f11 in v5.10.220, LTP fanotify22 is failing because of timeout as no notification. To fix need to merge following two upstream commit to v5.10:
124e7c61deb27d758df5ec0521c36cf08d417f7a: 0001-ext4_fix_error_code_saved_on_super_block_during_file_system.patch https://lore.kernel.org/stable/1721717240-8786-1-git-send-email-ajay.kaher@b...
9a089b21f79b47eed240d4da7ea0d049de7c9b4d: 0001-ext4_Send_notifications_on_error.patch Link: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/1721717240-8786-1-git-send-email-ajay.kaher@b...
-Ajay
I agree that this is the best approach, because the test has no other way to test if ext4 specifically supports FAN_FS_ERROR.
Chuck,
I wonder how those patches end up in 5.15.y but not in 5.10.y?
I wonder why this was backported to stable in the first place. I get there is a lot of refactoring in this series, which might be useful when backporting further fixes. but 9709bd548f11 just enabled a new feature - which seems against stable rules. Considering that "anything is a CVE", we really need to be cautious about this kind of stuff in stable kernels.
Is it possible to drop 9709bd548f11 from stable instead?
Gabriel, if 9abeae5d4458 has a Fixes: tag it may have been auto seleced for 5.15.y after c0baf9ac0b05 was picked up...
right. It would be really cool if we had a way to append this information after the fact. How would people feel about using git-notes in the kernel tree to support that?