linux-ext4 - Re: Rare xfsqa test failure

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]

Message-ID: <20090818214218.GK28560@mit.edu>
Date:	Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:42:18 -0400
From:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Rare xfsqa test failure

On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:07:05AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > EXTENTS:
> > (65-80): 60720-60735, (81-222 [uninit]): 1181574-1181715, (223-229): 1181716-118
> > 1722
> > debugfs:  
> > 
> > So it looks like there's a race which can cause ext4 to somehow miss an
> > i_size update.
> 
> Are you sure it is a failure to update i_size, or is it possibly an
> fallocate that extends the block count beyond i_size?

Look at the EXTENTS report from debugfs; blocks 81-222 are
uninitialized from an fallocate, but block 223-229 are initialized.

	      	      		     	   - Ted
--
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