linux-ext4 - Re: Regression with ext4 in kernel 2.6.39-rc7? (Was: testing ext4 master branch)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 13 May 2011 12:28:13 -0500
From:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To:	Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
CC:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression with ext4 in kernel 2.6.39-rc7? (Was: testing ext4
 master branch)

On 5/13/11 12:25 PM, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On 5/13/11 9:56 AM, Ted Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:17:03PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone try to reproduce the error with xfstest 005 and the crash
>>>> with xfstest 232?
>>>
>>> Xfstest #5 broke because of a change in the VFS, which now allows up
>>> to 40 nested symlinks.  So that's a matter of your xfstests being too
>>> old.
>>>
>>> The version of xfstests I've been using on my KVM box is too old to
>>> have test 232, so I haven't been able to test it.  I've been trying to
>>> use a newer version of xfstests, but xfstests doesn't build on either
>>> Ubuntu 10.04 (LTS), Debian stable, or Debian unstable, due to the use
>>> of newer XFS ioctl's and xfsctl's that aren't defined in the system
>>> header files.  The fact that it doesn't work on Ubuntu LTS and Stable
>>> is not that surprising, I suppose, but I was a bit disappointed that
>>> it doesn't work on Debian unstable.
>>
>> I missed that bug report :)  If you can send me the details of the
>> failures we can probably add configure tests for any new ioctls
>> that are causing build failures.
>>
>>> Since I don't have a Fedora system handy --- which header file are
>>> things like "struct xfs_flock64" supposed to be defined these days?
>>
>> Hm, well, on my Fedora system, /usr/include/xfs/xfs_fs.h, from xfsprogs-devel.
>>
>> I don't think that has changed in a very long time...
>>
>> I also package an xfsprogs-qa-devel which has some additional pieces in
>> it to support xfstests.  Debian could do the same ... "make install-qa"
>> in xfsprogs puts those bits into the root.
>>
> 
> After xfstests failed to build on Ubuntu 10.10,  I followed the advice omitted
> by the build script to run "make install-qa", to solve the problem.
> It took me a while to figure exactly where I should run the command,
> but in the end I pulled the xfsprogs tree, ran "make; make install;
> make install-qa"
> and from there on things were looking better.

I can ask Nathan if he can package the qa bits for debian.

Or, you all could just use Fedora ;)

-Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html