Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/fuse: add ACL_DONT_CACHE regression test

On Thu Jul 16, 2026 at 6:10 PM CST, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 10:41=E2=80=AFPM Luis Henriques <[email protected]>=
 wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 15 2026, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>> >> A question: in my own tests I have been following a different approac=
h,
>> >> where the filesystem is mounted from a shell script that does the act=
ual
>> >> testing.  I wonder if you think your approach (i.e. writing the actua=
l
>> >> test in C, using the kselftest macros) is the preferred one.
>> >
>> > I always prefer a standalone C program for a selftest.
>> > For fstests naturally the tests are done by the shell scripts,
>> > so it really depends.
>>
>> Cool, thanks.  I'll consider adapting my own tests to have a similar
>> format as this one.
>>
>> >> Anyway, the test looks good to me, and I just have a few minor commen=
ts
>> >> below.
>> >>
>> >> > fuse_acl_cache_test is only built when libfuse3 is detected via
>> >> > pkg-config.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, I've sent a patch recently converting the only existing test to=
 also
>> >> user fuse3 instead.  Not sure that's acceptable though, since there's=
 a
>> >> chance of breaking some CI.
>> >
>> > I mean if the test is not built it wont run, so I don't know why CI wo=
uld fail.
>> > Obviously some systems do not have libfuse. That's fine by me
>> > not everyone needs to run all the tests.
>>
>> Oh! as usual my comment wasn't clear :-)
>>
>> In fact, my comment wasn't really very relevant in the context of this
>> patch as, in my opinion, I think it's OK for new tests to depend on fuse=
3.
>>
>> I was talking about my own patch[1] which was converting the existing
>> test, which depends on fuse2, to use fuse3.  That's what I was referring
>> to when talking about breaking CI: we could have a scenario where a test
>> was being built and executed and, because it's now using fuse3, it can't
>> be built any more.
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>>
>
> CC test author
> I think your concern is exaggerated
> This test is 1 year old. Who runs this test and doesn't have fuse3?

A quick note on why it used fuse2 to begin with: back then there was no
fuse3-based test anywhere in the selftests tree. Amir actually pointed me
to tools/testing/selftests/memfd [1] as the reference to follow, and
that one (both its Makefile and fuse_mnt.c) is built on libfuse2, so I
simply copied that pattern for consistency.

Thanks,
Chen Linxuan

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAOQ4uxjKFXOKQxPpxtS6G_nR0tpw95w0GiO68UcWg_=
[email protected]/