linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] generic/017: skip tests with mkfs failures

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: <20141007005300.GA11741@thunk.org>
Date:	Mon, 6 Oct 2014 20:53:00 -0400
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Paul Paulson <paul.paulson@...gate.com>
Cc:	fstests@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] generic/017: skip tests with mkfs failures

On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 01:23:50PM -0500, Paul Paulson wrote:
> The mkfs command fails to create ext4 filesystems on partition sizes
> greater than 1998080 MiB when using 1024 byte blocks and the default
> calculation for the number of inodes reserved for the filesystem.

I've never noticed a problem because creating a partition that large
makes the xfstests runs take a long, long time.  I typically use a 5
GB or 20GB partition.  Is there a particular reason why you are trying
to do test ext4 using a 1k blocksize for a 2T file system?  We can fix
mke2fs so it doesn't fail when you create a > 2T file system with a 1k
block size, but the bigger question in my mind is why anyone would
ever want to do that?

					- 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