On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 7:21 AM Deepa Dinamani <deepa.ker...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The mount behavior will not be altered because of the unsupported > timestamps on the filesystems. > > Adjust the test accordingly. > > An updated series to be posted after the merge window is hosted at > <https://github.com/deepa-hub/vfs/tree/limits> > > Signed-off-by: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.ker...@gmail.com> > --- > common/rc | 36 +++++++++--------- > tests/generic/402 | 87 ++++++++++++++++--------------------------- > tests/generic/402.out | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc > index 25203bb4..39a2deb0 100644 > --- a/common/rc > +++ b/common/rc > @@ -1959,16 +1959,9 @@ _run_aiodio() > return $status > } > > -# this test requires y2038 sysfs switch and filesystem > -# timestamp ranges support. > -_require_y2038() > +_require_timestamp_range() > { > local device=${1:-$TEST_DEV} > - local sysfsdir=/proc/sys/fs/fs-timestamp-check-on > - > - if [ ! -e $sysfsdir ]; then > - _notrun "no kernel support for y2038 sysfs switch" > - fi >
Deepa, This change, which is already merged removed the test for kernel support and replaced it with test only for filesystem support. This impacts people validating stable kernel releases with xfstest, because this test now always fails on stable kernels and I don't think that timestamp clamping behavior is going to stable kernels. Of course stable kernel testers can exclude this test, but this will remove test coverage and may result in silent breakage of > y2038 timetamps in stable kernels. I think test should identify if kernel had clamping behavior and change the expected timestamp values accordingly, similar to how the test was before adjusting it to new behavior. Do you agree? Can you make these changes? Thanks, Amir. _______________________________________________ Y2038 mailing list Y2038@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/y2038
