linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 2/3 v2] XFS TESTS: Fix 252 Failure: Update 252 Golden Output

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Message-ID: <4E09ED36.2040903@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:03:18 -0700
From:	Allison Henderson <achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
CC:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>, xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 v2] XFS TESTS: Fix 252 Failure: Update 252 Golden
 Output

On 06/28/2011 06:29 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 6/28/11 12:26 AM, Allison Henderson wrote:
>> On 06/27/2011 10:09 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 09:27:26PM -0700, Allison Henderson wrote:
>>>> New filtered golden output for test 252
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Allison Henderson<achender@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> :100644 100644 930c924... fcfd121... M    252.out
>>>>    252.out |  272 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>>>>    1 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/252.out b/252.out
>>>> index 930c924..fcfd121 100644
>>>> --- a/252.out
>>>> +++ b/252.out
>>>> @@ -1,239 +1,307 @@
>>>>    QA output created by 252
>>>>        1. into a hole
>>>> +daa100df6e6711906b61c9ab5aa16032
>>>>        2. into allocated space
>>>> -0: [0..7]: data
>>>> +0: [0..7]: extent
>>>>    1: [8..23]: hole
>>>> -2: [24..39]: data
>>>> +2: [24..39]: extent
>>>> +cc58a7417c2d7763adc45b6fcd3fa024
>>>
>>> I don't really like the way this weakens the test for XFS. With this
>>> change, the test no longer is checking that unwritten extent
>>> behaviour is correct.
>>>
>>> Rather than weakening the test, perhaps it would be better to
>>> execute 252 for XFS only (with the md5sums added), and then
>>> duplicate it to a new test for all filesystems to run with the
>>> weaker result checking that using the new filter function gives us.
>>> With the amount of common code the two tests share, it should be
>>> trivial to do this....
>>>
>>
>> Alrighty, that sounds pretty straight forward, as long as every one
>> is in agreement. I think that would help retain the tests
>> effectiveness. Eric, Josef, what are your thoughts?
>
> Yeah, I agree, I share Dave's concerns and that sounds like a good
> way to go.
>
> Thanks,
> -Eric

Ok I will get an update sent out with these adjustments, and also the 
checksum wrapper that Dave mentioned in the 1/3 patch.  Thanks all
for your reviews!

Allison Henderson

>
>> Allison Henderson
>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Dave.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xfs mailing list
> xfs@....sgi.com
> http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

--
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

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