Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH RFC 0/4] 9p: fix open-unlink-f*syscall bug

[Greg Kurz]

On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:46:30 +0200
Greg Kurz <groug@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 17:19:20 +0200
> Christian Schoenebeck <qemu_oss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Montag, 14. September 2020 14:43:25 CEST Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > > So yes, looks like this also requires changes to the 9pfs 'local' fs
> > > > driver on QEMU side:
> > > > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-06/msg07586.html
> > > > 
> > > > Eric, Greg, would there be an easy way to establish QEMU test cases
> > > > running
> > > > the 9pfs 'local' fs driver? Right now we only have 9pfs qtest cases for
> > > > QEMU which can only use the 'synth' driver, which is not helpful for such
> > > > kind of issues.
> > > 
> > > I guess it's possible to introduce new qtests that start QEMU with
> > > -fsdev local instead of -fsdev synth... I haven't looked in a while
> > > though, so I won't comment on "easy way" ;-)
> > 
> > Makes sense, and I considered that approach as well.
> > 
> > The question is the following: is there a QEMU policy about test cases that 
> > create/write/read/delete *real* files? I.e. should those test files be written 
> > to a certain location, and are there measures of sandboxing required?
> > 
> 
> I don't know. You'll need to figure out by yourself, reading code from
> other tests or asking on IRC.
> 

Maybe Thomas (added in Cc) can give some hints on how test cases should
handle creation/deletion of real files ?

> > Best regards,
> > Christian Schoenebeck
> > 
> > 
>