Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sun, 5 Jul 2020 09:34:26 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
Cc:     viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, mtk.manpages@gmail.com, shuah@kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-man@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] selftests: add readfile(2) selftests
Message-ID: <20200705073426.GA37944@kroah.com>
References: <20200704140250.423345-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20200704140250.423345-4-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
 <fdaa31b7-b045-e38b-680a-01f0389e6acc@gmx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <fdaa31b7-b045-e38b-680a-01f0389e6acc@gmx.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Jul 05, 2020 at 03:41:48AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 7/4/20 4:02 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > Test the functionality of readfile(2) in various ways.
> 
> Hello Greg,
> 
> I expect readfile() to generate fanotify events FAN_OPEN_PERM, FAN_OPEN,
> FAN_ACCESS_PERM, FAN_ACCESS, FAN_CLOSE_NOWRITE in this sequence.

Yes, it should, I don't think I do anything unique here when it comes to
vfs accesses that would go around those events.

> Looking at patch 1/3 you took care of notifications. Would this deserve
> testing here?

Possibly, do we have other in-tree tests of syscalls that validate those
events properly being created?

thanks,

greg k-h