Michael Kerrisk wrote: > Hi Li > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Li Zefan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Michael Kerrisk wrote: >>> Hi Li, >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Li Zefan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> on 2.6.23 kernel on Mips and i686 arch. >>>>> >>>> ... >>>>> -bash-3.2# ./inotify02 >>>>> >>>>> inotify02 1 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=40000004 cookie=0 len=0 >>>>> name="" >>>>> inotify02 2 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=100 cookie=0 len=16 >>>>> name="test_file1" >>>>> inotify02 3 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=20 cookie=0 len=16 >>>>> name="test_file1" >>>>> inotify02 4 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=8 cookie=0 len=16 >>>>> name="test_file1" >>>>> inotify02 5 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=40 cookie=23 len=16 >>>>> name="test_file1" >>>>> inotify02 6 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=80 cookie=23 len=16 >>>>> name="test_file2" >>>>> inotify02 7 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=800 cookie=0 len=0 name="" >>>>> inotify02 8 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=200 cookie=0 len=16 >>>>> name="test_file2" >>>>> inotify02 9 PASS : get event: wd=1 mask=800 cookie=0 len=0 name="" >>>>> inotify02 10 FAIL : get unnecessary event: wd=1 mask=800 cookie=0 >>>>> len=0name="" >>>>> -bash-3.2# >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This inotify02 test case failed. >>>>> >>>>> Please give fix for the same. >>>>> >>>> But fix what... >>>> >>>> You are using 2.6.23, and the bug in inotify was fixed in 2.6.25, so the >>>> above >>>> is exactly the expected result. >>> Actually, what was the bug in 2.6.24 and earlier? Maybe it is >>> something that needs to be documented in man-pages. >>> >> In the manpage: >> >> If successive output inotify events produced on the inotify file >> descriptor are identical (same wd, mask, cookie, and name) then they >> are coalesced into a single event. >> >> This is not true in older kernels due to the bug. > > Bother! I remember testing this, but only in a simple fashion: > queuing two eevets that were the same, and fiding that they were > coalesced. So if I understand correctly (and some testing now seems > to indicate that this is true), then a new inotify event was checked > to see if it could be coleasced with the oldest event that was queued, > rather than the most recently queued event. Right? >
Yes, exactly. >> The bug description and fix is 1c17d18e3775485bf1e0ce79575eb637a94494a2 >> >> I agree it's better to document it in man-pages. > > Yes, I will document this. > Great. :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
