linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 4/8] Add test of quota accounting using fsx

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4C4E0229.5040002@sandeen.net>
Date:	Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:46:17 -0500
From:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC:	hch@...radead.org, xfs@....sgi.com,
	ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] Add test of quota accounting using fsx

On 06/15/2010 04:55 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 09-06-10 12:49:49, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Jan Kara wrote:
>>> Run fsx (and also several fsx threads in parallel) and verify that
>>> quota accounting is correct after they finish.
>>
>> Jan, I'm having trouble with this one on XFS for some reason, with our 
>> RHEL6 kernel and quota-3.17...
>   OK, attached is an improvement to the XFSQA tests after which all quota
> tests pass for XFS just fine.
>   The second patch is just minor general improvement of _require_scratch
> macro.
>   Could they be added to XFSQA repository? Thanks.

Jan, I've got some ext4 failures reported on these, although I can't hit
them, so not quite sure what's going on.

In 231:

+< fsgqa     --     760       0       0              3     0     0
+---
+> fsgqa     --     764       0       0              3     0     0
+14c14
+< fsgqa     --     760       0       0              3     0     0
+---
+> fsgqa     --     764       0       0              3     0     0

after the quotacheck & repquota we have 4 more blocks.  Maybe this
is due to my accounting of metadata blocks at write time, and not
before ... would it be reasonable to put a sync call as the first
line of check_usage() ?

Also in 233:

+< #501      --   15392       0       0            998     0     0
+< #501      --   15392   32000   32000            998  1000  1000
+---
+> #501      +-   32084   32000   32000  7days     998  1000  1000
+> #501      --   32084       0       0            998     0     0

"7days" magically appeared after the quotacheck.  Not sure what's going
on there...

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