Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Add pidfd support to the fanotify API

On Thu 10-06-21 16:55:46, Matthew Bobrowski wrote:

quoted

quoted

  fanotify: add pidfd support to the fanotify API

This one looks mostly fine. Gave some minor comments.

The biggest thing I am missing is a link to an LTP test draft and
man page update draft.

Fair point, the way I approached it was that I'd get the ACK from all of
you on the overall implementation and then go ahead with providing
additional things like LTP and man-pages drafts, before the merge is
performed.

quoted

In general, I think it is good practice to provide a test along with any
fix, but for UAPI changes we need to hold higher standards - both the
test and man page draft should be a must before merge IMO.

Agree, moving forward I will take this approach.

quoted

We already know there is going to be a clause about FAN_NOPIDFD
and so on... I think it is especially hard for people on linux-api list to
review a UAPI change without seeing the contract in a user manual
format. Yes, much of the information is in the commit message, but it
is not the same thing as reading a user manual and verifying that the
contract makes sense to a programmer.

Makes sense.

I agree with Amir that before your patches can get merged we need a manpage
update & LTP coverage. But I fully understand your approach of trying to
figure out how things will look like before writing the tests and manpage
to save some adaptation of tests & doc as the code changes. For relatively
simple changes like this one that approach is fine by me as well (for more
complex API changes it's often easier to actually *start* with a manpage to
get an idea where we are actually heading). I just want the tests & doc to
be part of at least one submission so that e.g. people on linux-api have a
good chance to review stuff without having to dive into code details.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara [off-list ref]
SUSE Labs, CR