linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] xfstests: avoid ext4/306 failures caused by incompatible mount options

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]

Date:	Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:43:59 -0600
From:	Eric Sandeen <esandeen@...hat.com>
To:	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Eric Whitney <enwlinux@...il.com>
CC:	xfs@....sgi.com, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: avoid ext4/306 failures caused by incompatible
 mount options

On 1/29/14, 3:38 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 03:45:02PM -0500, Eric Whitney wrote:
>> ext4/306 will fail when mounting the ext3 file system it creates if an
>> ext3-incompatible mount option is applied by _scratch_mount.  This can
>> happen if EXT_MOUNT_OPTIONS is defined appropriately in the test
>> environment.  For example, the block_validity option is commonly used
>> to enhance ext4 testing, and it is not supported by ext3.  Fix this by
>> not including any mount options defined by the test environment.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand why the test is insisting that the file
> system be mounted using ext3.  If the file system is created without
> the extents flag, all of the files will be created using indirect
> blocks, and fundamentally what this test is getting at is that after
> we grow the file system using resize2fs, the new blocks are available
> to be allocated and attached to an indirect block file.
> 
> We can do this by using ext4; I'm not sure why this test is trying to
> use ext3 to set up the test flie system.  It might be better to get
> rid of the requirement to create the file system using ext3, since it
> will make the test runnable even if the ext3 file system hasn't been
> configured into the system and CONFIG_EXT23_AS_EXT4 is not enabled.
> 
> IIRC, Eric Sandeen wrote this test --- Eric, am I missing some reason
> why it was necessary to use ext3 here?

Nope.  Tomayto, tomahto - I think the original report had trouble with
an ext3 filesystem, so that's how I wrote the testcase.

It could be fixed either way, I think.

-Eric

> 
> 					- 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