linux-ext4 - Re: fio test triggering bad data on ext4

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: <4C1B7C73.505@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jun 2010 09:02:27 -0500
From:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <jaxboe@...ionio.com>
CC:	tytso@....edu, adilger@....com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fio test triggering bad data on ext4

Jens Axboe wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was writing a small fio job file to do writes and read verifies on a
> device. It forks 32 processes, each writing randomly to 4 files with a
> block size between 4k and 16k. When it has written 1024 of those blocks,
> it'll verify the oldest 512 of them. Each block is checksummed for every
> 512b. It uses libaio and O_DIRECT.
> 
> It works on ext2 and btrfs. I haven't run it to completion yet, but they
> survive 15-20 minutes just fine. ext4 doesn't even go a full minutes
> before this triggers:

Jens, can you try XFS too?  Since ext3 can't do direct IO to a hole,
(and I'm not sure about btrfs in that regard), ext4 may be most similar
to xfs's behavior on the test ... wondering how it fares.

Thanks,
-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