linux-ext4 - Re: backporting "ext4: inplace xattr block update fails to deduplicate blocks" to LTS kernels?

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:37:54 +0200
From:   Tommi Rantala <tommi.t.rantala@...ia.com>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Tahsin Erdogan <tahsin@...gle.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: backporting "ext4: inplace xattr block update fails to
 deduplicate blocks" to LTS kernels?

On 21.02.2018 17:56, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:40:00PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 03:26:37PM +0200, Tommi Rantala wrote:
>>>
>>> OK to backport it?
>>> I tested it briefly in 4.9, seems to work.
> 
> It looks sane, but it would be nice if I can get people who are
> backporting ext4 patches to make sure there are no regressions using
> one of kvm-xfstests[1] or gce-xfstests[2][3].....
> 
> [1] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/Documentation/kvm-xfstests.md
> [2] https://github.com/tytso/xfstests-bld/blob/master/Documentation/gce-xfstests.md
> [3] https://thunk.org/gce-xfstests
> 
> I do run regression tests[4] on stable kernels when I have time, but
> it scales much better when other people can help.
> 
> [4] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tytso/ext4.git/tag/?h=ext4-4.9.54-1
> 
>> I need an ack from the ext4 maintainers before I can take this...
> 
> Greg, you can go ahead and take this, but in the future I'd appreciate
> it if ext4 backporters could at least run a smoke test (which takes
> less than 15 minutes on GCE) before and after the patch, and report no
> test regressions.

Thanks for the instructions!

Smoke test results 4.9.82 with and without the patch (attached, to avoid 
email client mangling it), no new failures:

-------------------- Summary report
KERNEL:    kernel 4.9.82-xfstests #2 SMP Thu Feb 22 14:58:27 EET 2018 x86_64
CPUS:      2
MEM:       1989.2

ext4/4k: 271 tests, 7 failures, 34 skipped, 737 seconds
   Failures: generic/081 generic/383 generic/384 generic/386
     generic/441 generic/451 generic/472
Totals: 271 tests, 34 skipped, 7 failures, 0 errors, 685s


-------------------- Summary report
KERNEL:    kernel 4.9.82-xfstests-00001-gb98ae0251413 #1 SMP Thu Feb 22 
14:31:01 EET 2018 x86_64
CPUS:      2
MEM:       1989.2

ext4/4k: 271 tests, 7 failures, 34 skipped, 749 seconds
   Failures: generic/081 generic/383 generic/384 generic/386
     generic/441 generic/451 generic/472
Totals: 271 tests, 34 skipped, 7 failures, 0 errors, 694s

FSTESTVER: e2fsprogs v1.43.6-85-g7595699d0 (Wed, 6 Sep 2017 22:04:14 -0400)
FSTESTVER: fio  fio-3.2 (Fri, 3 Nov 2017 15:23:49 -0600)
FSTESTVER: quota  4d81e8b (Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:42:44 +0200)
FSTESTVER: stress-ng 977ae35 (Wed, 6 Sep 2017 23:45:03 -0400)
FSTESTVER: xfsprogs v4.14.0-rc2-1-g19ca9b0b (Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:56:21 
-0600)
FSTESTVER: xfstests-bld ff7b8c2 (Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:24:24 -0500)
FSTESTVER: xfstests linux-v3.8-1832-gafeee2d9 (Sun, 31 Dec 2017 13:35:28 
-0500)
FSTESTCFG: 4k
FSTESTSET: -g quick
FSTESTOPT: aex


Tommi

View attachment "0001-ext4-inplace-xattr-block-update-fails-to-deduplicate.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (2224 bytes)