public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Liebler <stli@linux.ibm.com>
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
	libc-alpha@sourceware.org, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] S390: Don't test nanoseconds in io/tst-stat.c
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:13:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7f30b64e-63f7-7f8d-17bb-134fc5ea102a@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1b859ba2-29bf-03f9-7b5d-db5b451857db@linaro.org>

On 18/03/2021 14:31, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> 
> 
> On 17/03/2021 10:03, Stefan Liebler wrote:
>> Both new tests io/tst-stat and io/tst-stat-lfs (_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64)
>> are comparing the nanosecond fields with the statx result.  Unfortunately
>> on s390(31bit) those fields are always zero if old KABI with non-LFS
>> support is used.  With _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 stat is using statx internally.
>>
>> As suggested by Adhemerval this patch disables the nanosecond check for
>> s390(31bit).
> 
> LGTM, the fstatat call does not call statx and even for LFS that call statx
> it might ended calling old stat syscall in the fallback part that does not
> 
> About the __ASSUME_STATX note Joseph has raised, I think we should add it
> on Linux at least for fstatat64 implementation. However it does not really
> help on the fstatat one.  I will try to spare some time to make fstatat.c
> use statx as well, so we can tie the test to __ASSUME_STATX.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Adhemerval Zanella  <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
> 

Hi Adhemerval,

Sorry for the delay, I was busy with another project.
Thanks for your series
"[PATCH 1/5] linux: Implement fstatat with __fstatat64_time64"
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2021-March/124191.html

As also mentioned there, with your series, at least on my s390 systems,
stat is then using statx and the nanosecond fields are not zero anymore.

Shall I commit my patch as is and as soon as you've commited your
series, you can adjust support_stat_nanoseconds to return false if
__ASSUME_STATX is not defined?

Thanks,
Stefan

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-23 16:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-17 13:03 Stefan Liebler
2021-03-17 21:01 ` Joseph Myers
2021-03-17 21:20   ` Adhemerval Zanella
2021-03-18 13:31 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2021-03-23 16:13   ` Stefan Liebler [this message]
2021-03-24 17:40     ` Adhemerval Zanella
2021-03-26  9:24       ` Stefan Liebler

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7f30b64e-63f7-7f8d-17bb-134fc5ea102a@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=stli@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).