Signed-off-by: Fabian Franz <github@fabian-franz.de>
Signed-off-by: Will Cohen <wwcohen@gmail.com>
---
 tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
index 41fed41de1..6bcf89f0f8 100644
--- a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
+++ b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
@@ -1270,7 +1270,7 @@ static void fs_unlinkat_dir(void *obj, void *data, QGuestAllocator *t_alloc)
     /* ... and is actually a directory */
     g_assert((st.st_mode & S_IFMT) == S_IFDIR);
 
-    do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", AT_REMOVEDIR);
+    do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR);
     /* directory should be gone now */
     g_assert(stat(new_dir, &st) != 0);
 
-- 
2.34.1

-EMISSINGPATCHDESCRIPTION

Please avoid sending patches without patch description. E.g. explain here 
*why* this needs to be adjusted.

  Thanks,
   Thomas


On 28/01/2022 01.56, Will Cohen wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Fabian Franz <github@fabian-franz.de>
> Signed-off-by: Will Cohen <wwcohen@gmail.com>
> ---
>   tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> index 41fed41de1..6bcf89f0f8 100644
> --- a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> +++ b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> @@ -1270,7 +1270,7 @@ static void fs_unlinkat_dir(void *obj, void *data, QGuestAllocator *t_alloc)
>       /* ... and is actually a directory */
>       g_assert((st.st_mode & S_IFMT) == S_IFDIR);
>   
> -    do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", AT_REMOVEDIR);
> +    do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR);
>       /* directory should be gone now */
>       g_assert(stat(new_dir, &st) != 0);
>   

Apologies! The explanation (and what I'll include in v4) is below:

The previous test depended on the assumption that P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR and
AT_REMOVEDIR have the same value.

While this is true on Linux, it is not true everywhere, and leads to an
incorrect test failure on unlink_at, noticed when adding 9p to darwin.

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 2:04 AM Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:

>
> -EMISSINGPATCHDESCRIPTION
>
> Please avoid sending patches without patch description. E.g. explain here
> *why* this needs to be adjusted.
>
>   Thanks,
>    Thomas
>
>
> On 28/01/2022 01.56, Will Cohen wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Fabian Franz <github@fabian-franz.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Will Cohen <wwcohen@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c | 2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> > index 41fed41de1..6bcf89f0f8 100644
> > --- a/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> > +++ b/tests/qtest/virtio-9p-test.c
> > @@ -1270,7 +1270,7 @@ static void fs_unlinkat_dir(void *obj, void *data,
> QGuestAllocator *t_alloc)
> >       /* ... and is actually a directory */
> >       g_assert((st.st_mode & S_IFMT) == S_IFDIR);
> >
> > -    do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", AT_REMOVEDIR);
> > +    do_unlinkat(v9p, "/", "02", P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR);
> >       /* directory should be gone now */
> >       g_assert(stat(new_dir, &st) != 0);
> >
>
>

On Freitag, 28. Januar 2022 14:38:43 CET Will Cohen wrote:
> Apologies! The explanation (and what I'll include in v4) is below:
> 
> The previous test depended on the assumption that P9_DOTL_AT_REMOVEDIR and
> AT_REMOVEDIR have the same value.
> 
> While this is true on Linux, it is not true everywhere, and leads to an
> incorrect test failure on unlink_at, noticed when adding 9p to darwin.

Additionally describing the observed misbehaviour is always useful.

Best regards,
Christian Schoenebeck