[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140529060048.GB27499@birch.djwong.org>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 23:00:48 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc: ext4 development <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: more resize breakage
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:29:35AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> On 5/29/14, 12:27 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:22:37AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >> After considering how many resize2fs corruptions we've had, I decided to try to write a resize fuzzer which picks random parameters and sizes, and sees what happens with online & offline grow & offline shrink. When I get it cleaner, I'll send it out to play with.
> >>
> >> But it is indeed finding resize issues; for example, with e2fsprogs git master & v3.15-rc3,
>
> <snip>
>
> >> Sad face. :(
> >
> > D'oh!
> >
> > /me wonders, is offline grow any better?
>
> Yes, offline passed.
>
> > Also I "extended" fsfuzz to corrupt only metadata blocks and made the
> > kernel+e2fsck chew through all that crap. The kernel survived, but e2fsck
> > seemed to die either failing to allocate blocks to resurrect the journal (bad
> > bbitmap) or because of that thing where calling block_iterate on an inline data
> > file makes e2fsck abort.
> >
> > So, uh, ... long live the patchbomb? :(
>
> yeah. Maybe I (you?) should try my testcase w/ your latest patchbomb. ;)
I think I only have patches out for review for e2fsprogs at the moment. I've
not put my grubby hands on kernel code in a while.
--D
>
> -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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists