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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:42:29 +0800
From:	Zhao Hongjiang <>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <>
CC:	<>, <>
Subject: Re: xfstests failure generic/239

On 2013/6/9 11:29, Zhao Hongjiang wrote:
> On 2013/6/9 10:37, Zhao Hongjiang wrote:
>> On 2013/6/9 6:30, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 11:13:35AM +0800, Zhao Hongjiang wrote:
>>>> I run xfstests #239 against mainline 3.10.0-rc3, unfortunately it failure in my QEMU. I run the
>>>> case a hundred times, it certainly hit the failure several times. The failure msg is as follow:
>>>> FSTYP         -- ext4
>>>> PLATFORM      -- Linux/x86_64  3.10.0-rc3-mainline
>>>> generic/239 1s ... - output mismatch (see /home/zhj/xfstests/results/generic/239.out.bad)
>>>>     --- tests/generic/239.out   2013-06-07 22:04:09.000000000 -0400
>>>>     +++ /home/zff/xfstests/results/generic/239.out.bad  2013-06-07 22:04:09.000000000 -0400
>>>>     @@ -1,2 +1,515 @@
>>>>      QA output created by 239
>>>>     +hostname: Host name lookup failure
>>> OK, so this hostname failure is weird; I'm not sure what's causing
>>> this, but this I presume unrelated to the failure at hand.
>>>>      Silence is golden
>>>>     +0: 0x0
>>>>     +1: 0x0
>>>>     +2: 0x0
>>>>     +3: 0x0
>>> This indicates a problem.  Test generic/239 is running
>>> aio-dio-hole-filling-race.c, which submits an asynchronous, direct I/O
>>> 4k write with a buffer containing non-zero contents to a sparse file,
>>> and once the I/O has completed, it uses pread to read it back, using
>>> the same descriptor, so it is doing the read using direct I/O.  It
>>> then checks to see if the read returns zero or not.  
>>> The "XX: 0x0" lines indicates that buffer is zero, which implies that
>>> somehow aio_complete() is getting called before the uninitialized to
>>> initialized conversion is taking place.  I'm not seeing how this is
>>> happening, though, so I'm a bit puzzled.  If there are any unwritten
>>> extents, we don't call aio_complete() in ext4_end_io_dio(), but
>>> instead the conversion is queued via a call to ext4_add_compete_io(),
>>> and and aio_done() is only called on the iocb after the conversion is
>>> complete.
>>> Can anyone see something that I might be missing?
>>>     	       		      	      - Ted
>>> P.S.  Zhao, what was the hardware that you using to find this failure?
>> I'am use x86 and start a qumu-kvm to run the test. 
more informations:

8  Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU           E5620  @ 2.40GHz

Host: scsi0 Channel: 02 Id: 01 Lun: 00
  Vendor: LSI      Model: MegaRAID SAS RMB Rev: 1.40
  Type:   Direct-Access                    ANSI  SCSI revision: 05

>>> I'm not seeing it, but then again if the failure is only happening
>>> once every few hundred runs that might explain it.  I'm perhaps
>> And as Christoph Hellwig  said "the race is very easy to hit by using QEMU with
>> native AIO support on a sparse image, and the result is filesystem corruption 
>> in the guest", i also run the test on the host, but nerver see the failure.
> Sorry, i run the test on host a hundred times again, there are six failures.
>>> wondering if we should add a mode to aio-dio-hole-filling-race.c which
>>> allows it to try the race a large number of times, instead of just
>>> once.
>> This seems necessary, i'll give a patch for this.
>> 				   - Zhao
>>> P.P.S.  One thought.... perhaps it might be useful to have a debug
>>> mode where we use queue_delayed_work() to submit the conversion
>>> request to the workqueue.  It will of course make certain workloads
>>> run slow as molasses, but it might expose some races so we can see
>>> them more easily.
>>> .
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
> the body of a message to
> More majordomo info at
> .

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists