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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200725004043.32326-1-kalou@tfz.net> <20200725221022.GQ2786714@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20200725221022.GQ2786714@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
From:   Pascal Bouchareine <kalou@tfz.net>
Date:   Sat, 25 Jul 2020 18:42:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGbU3_my8uz0XU5kJ7k20Ex-+nGwSw+0+oXJ3zyGHDw+8ft4wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc,fcntl: introduce F_SET_DESCRIPTION
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 3:10 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> Have you even tried to test it?  When will it ever free those things?

Thanks for pointing that out, I'll try to address that in the thread

I did basic tests against 5.4: set a description, concurrently set it
from multiple child processes, read, demo with ss/netstat.

However I rebased against master and have not tested the build after
rebase, is that broken?
Should I use a different target for tests?

Thanks for your help