linux-ext4 - Re: NULL pointer dereference in ext4_ext_remove

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: <20120817203438.GA573@thunk.org>
Date:	Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:34:38 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	xfs@....sgi.com, ext4 hackers <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: NULL pointer dereference in ext4_ext_remove_space on 3.5.1

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 01:48:41PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> Can you submit this for xfstests?
> 

This is actually something I wanted to ask you guys about.  There are
a series of ext4-specific tests that I could potentially add, but I
wasn't sure how welcome they would be in xfstests.  Assuming that
ext4-specific tests would be welcome, is there a number range for
these ext4-specific tests that I should use?

BTW, we have an extension to xfstests that we've been using inside
Google where Google-internal tests have a "g" prefix (i.e., g001,
g002, etc.).  That way we didn't need to worry about conflicts between
newly added upstream xfstests, and ones which were added internally.
Would it make sense to start using some kind of prefix such as "e001"
for ext2/3/4 specific tests?

Regards,

						- 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