linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] xfstests: generic/403: reproduce ext4 bugs in a shift extents logic

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2017 11:18:50 -0800
From:   "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To:     Roman Penyaev <roman.penyaev@...fitbricks.com>
Cc:     Eryu Guan <eguan@...hat.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, fstests <fstests@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] xfstests: generic/403: reproduce ext4 bugs in a
 shift extents logic

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 09:02:25AM +0100, Roman Penyaev wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 5:08 AM, Eryu Guan <eguan@...hat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:52:39AM +0100, Roman Pen wrote:
> >> Regression test which targets two nasty ext4 bugs in a logic which
> >> shifts extents:
> >>
> >> 1) 14d981f468a1 ("ext4: Include forgotten start block on fallocate insert range")
> >>
> >> Test tries to insert many blocks at the same offset to reproduce
> >> the following layout on ext4:
> >>
> >>    block #0  block #1
> >>    |ext0 ext1|ext2 ext3 ...|
> >>         ^
> >>      insert of a new block
> >>
> >> Because of an incorrect range first block is never reached,
> >> thus ext1 is untouched, resulting to a hole at a wrong offset:
> >>
> >> What we got:
> >>
> >>    block #0   block #1
> >>    |ext0 ext1|   ext2 ext3 ...|
> >>               ^
> >>               hole at a wrong offset
> >>
> >> What we expect:
> >>
> >>    block #0    block #1
> >>    |ext0   ext1|ext2 ext3 ...|
> >>         ^
> >>         hole at a correct offset
> >>
> >> 2) 2b3864b32403 ("ext4: do not polute the extents cache while shifting extents")
> >>
> >> Extents status tree is filled in with outdated offsets while doing
> >> extent shift, that leads to wrong data blocks.   That's why md5sum
> >> of a result file is being checked after each block insert.
> >
> > Thanks a lot! I did a minor update and queued it up.
> >
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Roman Pen <roman.penyaev@...fitbricks.com>
> >> Cc: "Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>"
> >> Cc: Eryu Guan <eguan@...hat.com>
> >> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
> >> Cc: fstests@...r.kernel.org
> >> ---
> >
> >> +# Modify as appropriate.
> >> +_supported_fs generic
> >> +_supported_os Linux
> >> +_require_test
> >> +_require_xfs_io_command "finsert"
> >> +
> >> +blksize=`get_block_size $TEST_DIR`
> >
> > I merged a patch earlier from Darrick to rename get_block_size to
> > _get_block_size. So I did the rename here too.
> 
> Thanks.  The only thing which worries me is those commits references.
> These patches are in Theodore's dev branch and I hope SHA1 wont be
> changed.  Or maybe we have to postpone this new test till patches
> appear in mainline.  I do not know.

Please cite the subject line of the patch alongside the hash.

e.g. 'This test accompanies 9a1f4e6 ("xfs: inflate colorful balloons").'

--D

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