Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 22 Jun 2023 09:32:56 +0200
From:   Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To:     Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>
Cc:     Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>,
        Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
        kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
        "lkp@intel.com" <lkp@intel.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>,
        "oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev" <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        "ltp@lists.linux.it" <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [linux-next:master] [scsi] eca2040972:
 ltp.ioprio_set03.fail
Message-ID: <20230622073256.GA482307@pevik>
Reply-To: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
References: <202306192248.1ece4c29-oliver.sang@intel.com>
 <61f22c1d-6b04-d193-57c9-8cad1c555e4b@kernel.org>
 <ZJLxbwCno-it2xBB@yuki>
 <ZJMYP/CCVviG6IMq@x1-carbon>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZJMYP/CCVviG6IMq@x1-carbon>
Precedence: bulk

> On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 02:47:43PM +0200, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
> > Hi!
> > > > kernel test robot noticed "ltp.ioprio_set03.fail" on:

> > > LTP maintainers,

> > > Patches have been submitted to fix this issue. Were these patches applied ?

> > Looks like they are in, at least these two:

> >     ioprio: use ioprio.h kernel header if it exists
> >     ioprio: Use IOPRIO_PRIO_NUM to check prio range

> > And there does not seem to be anything ioprio related haning in the LTP
> > patchwork.

Hi Niklas,

> Hello Cyril, Petr, Damien,


> I just ran LTP master + linux-next and the test case passes for me.


> Although, note that even if you are using LTP master,
> the way that the LTP header:
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioprio/ioprio.h
> is written, you will need to run

> make headers_install
> with linux-next kernel source,

> before running
> make autotools && ./configure
> in LTP.

> Otherwise LTP will use the kernel uapi headers from your distro,
> which does not perform the new checks for the IOPRIO_PRIO_VALUE()
> macro. (It requires linux uapi headers from linux-next.)

Yes, it should do otherwise more tests would be often broken.


> Does the linux kernel test robot not run
> make headers_install
> before running
> make autotools && ./configure
> in LTP?

I guess that's the question for Damien (I and Cyril have nothing to do with
kernel test robot). I wonder myself.

> One option, although I'm not sure if we want this,
> is to change
> testcases/kernel/syscalls/ioprio/ioprio.h
> to do something like:

> #ifndef IOPRIO_BAD_VALUE
> # define IOPRIO_BAD_VALUE(val, max) ((val) < 0 || (val) >= (max))
> #endif

> such that LTP does not need to be compiled against the kernel uapi
> headers that match the running kernel.

> But... shouldn't the installed uapi headers match the running kernel?

Yes, whatever kernel version (stable, enterprise, mainline, linux-next, ...) is
being tested, the tester should make sure LTP is compiled against correct
headers.

Kind regards,
Petr

> Kind regards,
> Niklas