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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20141211200540.GE31008@thunk.org> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:05:40 -0500 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> To: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ext4: fix suboptimal seek_{data,hole} extents traversial Hi Dmitry, I only noticed this after I sent the pull request to Linus, but it looks like this patch is triggering regression using the ext3 config: ./kvm-xfstests -c ext3 generic/285: The failure reported by seek_santy_test is: 10. Test a huge file for offset overflow 10.01 SEEK_HOLE expected 65536 or 0, got 0. FAIL 10.02 SEEK_HOLE expected 65536 or 0, got 1. FAIL 10.03 SEEK_DATA expected 0 or 0, got -1. FAIL 10.04 SEEK_DATA expected 1 or 1, got -1. FAIL 10.05 SEEK_HOLE expected 0 or 0, got -65536. FAIL 10.06 SEEK_DATA expected -65536 or -65536, got -1. FAIL 10.07 SEEK_DATA expected -65535 or -65535, got -1. FAIL 10.08 SEEK_DATA expected -65536 or -65536, got -1. FAIL What's strange is that if I run the commands by hand, I get a very different failure: root@...-xfstests:~# ./xfstests/src/seek_sanity_test /vdd/seek_sanity_testfile File system magic#: 0xef53 Allocation size: 4096 Kernel does not support llseek(2) extensions SEEK_HOLE and/or SEEK_DATA. Aborting. Using strace, the problem is that the SEEK_DATA fallocate is failing: pwrite64(3, "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa"..., 8192, 0) = 8192 ftruncate64(3, 16384) = 0 _llseek(3, 0, 0xbff7fe70, SEEK_DATA) = -1 ENXIO (No such device or address) This fails with commit 14516bb: "ext4: fix suboptimal seek_{data,hole} extents traversial" and succeeds with its immediate predesssor commit. I've tried looking at this, but hte fact that I'm seeing different results when I run it by hand (sometimes I can trigger the failure with runtests.sh, usually I can't), means that it appears to be timing dependent. Could you take a look? Many thanks!! - 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists