On Sun, Aug 01, 2021 at 11:23:16PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 09:24:59AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:

quoted

I have the same (still unanswered) questions as last time:

1. What happens when you run ntfs3 through fstests with '-g all'?  I get
that the pass rate isn't going to be as high with ntfs3 as it is with
ext4/xfs/btrfs, but fstests can be adapted (see the recent attempts to
get exfat under test).

Indeed, it's not that hard at all.  I've included a patch to
xfstests-bld[1] so that you can just run "kvm-xfstests -c ntfs3 -g
auto".

Konstantin, I would *strongly* encourage you to try running fstests,
about 60 seconds into a run, we discover that generic/013 will trigger
locking problems that could lead to deadlocks.

It seems at least at my testing that if acl option is used then
generic/013 will pass. I have tested this with old linux-next commit
5a4cee98ea757e1a2a1354b497afdf8fafc30a20 I have still some of my own
code in it but I will test this tomorrow so I can be sure.

It also seems that acl support is broken. I also suspect ntfs-3g mkfs in
some failure cases. So maybe ntfs-3g mkfs will give different result than
Paragons mkfs. It would be nice to test with Paragons mkfs software or
that Paragon will test with ntfs-3g.