2015-04-23 06:26:00

by Huang, Ying

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [LKP] [fanotify] 66ba93c0d7f: i6300esb: Unexpected close, not stopping watchdog!

_______________________________________________
LKP mailing list
[email protected]


Attachments:
config-3.19.0-00467-g66ba93c0 (124.56 kB)
(No filename) (86.00 B)
dmesg (326.37 kB)
Download all attachments

2015-04-24 17:42:14

by Andrew Morton

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [LKP] [fanotify] 66ba93c0d7f: i6300esb: Unexpected close, not stopping watchdog!

On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:25:38 +0800 Huang Ying <[email protected]> wrote:

> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> commit 66ba93c0d7fe63def447ad0afe380307ff9ebcad ("fanotify: don't set FAN_ONDIR implicitly on a marks ignored mask")
>
> When doing LTP test. Test system hang after doing some fanotify test cases, while system
> can run to reboot in the parent comments.

Thanks. I've queued a reversion patch. I'll hold off sending it to
Linus for a while, to see if we can get this fixed up.


What does "hang" mean? Was the machine all locked up? Or is it the
case that the particular LTP test failed to complete? I suspect the
latter - that the new notify behaviour is differing from LTP's
expectation in some fashion?

2015-04-24 20:52:52

by Lino Sanfilippo

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [LKP] [fanotify] 66ba93c0d7f: i6300esb: Unexpected close, not stopping watchdog!

On 24.04.2015 19:42, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:25:38 +0800 Huang Ying <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
>> commit 66ba93c0d7fe63def447ad0afe380307ff9ebcad ("fanotify: don't set FAN_ONDIR implicitly on a marks ignored mask")
>>
>> When doing LTP test. Test system hang after doing some fanotify test cases, while system
>> can run to reboot in the parent comments.
>
> Thanks. I've queued a reversion patch. I'll hold off sending it to
> Linus for a while, to see if we can get this fixed up.
>
>
> What does "hang" mean? Was the machine all locked up? Or is it the
> case that the particular LTP test failed to complete? I suspect the
> latter - that the new notify behaviour is differing from LTP's
> expectation in some fashion?
>

Hi,

I think your suspicion is right, it looks like an issue that has been
reported a few weeks ago:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=142688498719023&w=2

The reason was not in kernel code though (as assumed by the reporter)
but a missing FAN_ONDIR in the code of the fanotify02 test case (that
flag was not needed before since it was set implicitly under certain
conditions - see the commit message of
66ba93c0d7fe63def447ad0afe380307ff9ebcad for details). The code has been
fixed in the latest version of LTP. I tested fanotify with this version
(20150420) and all tests passed.
Huang could it be that you did not use the latest LTP?

Regards,
Lino

2015-05-04 00:49:29

by Huang, Ying

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [LKP] [fanotify] 66ba93c0d7f: i6300esb: Unexpected close, not stopping watchdog!

Hi, Andrew,

Sorry for late. I am in vacation in last week.

On Fri, 2015-04-24 at 10:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:25:38 +0800 Huang Ying <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > FYI, we noticed the below changes on
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > commit 66ba93c0d7fe63def447ad0afe380307ff9ebcad ("fanotify: don't set FAN_ONDIR implicitly on a marks ignored mask")
> >
> > When doing LTP test. Test system hang after doing some fanotify test cases, while system
> > can run to reboot in the parent comments.
>
> Thanks. I've queued a reversion patch. I'll hold off sending it to
> Linus for a while, to see if we can get this fixed up.
>
>
> What does "hang" mean? Was the machine all locked up? Or is it the
> case that the particular LTP test failed to complete? I suspect the
> latter - that the new notify behaviour is differing from LTP's
> expectation in some fashion?

Sorry for confusion. The machine was not locked up, just the LTP test
failed to complete.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying