linux-ext4 - [Bug 201685] ext4 file system corruption

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: <bug-201685-13602-lpMm89gDF3@https.bugzilla.kernel.org/>
Date:   Wed, 21 Nov 2018 22:59:07 +0000
From:   bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org
To:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [Bug 201685] ext4 file system corruption

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201685

--- Comment #23 from Theodore Tso (tytso@....edu) ---
Jimmy, I don't blame you.   Unfortunately, I don't have a clean repro of the
problem because when I tried building a 4.20-rc2 kernel with
CONFIG_SCSI_MQ_DEFAULT=y, and tried running gce-xfstests, no problems were
detected.  And I'm too chicken to try running a kernel version which does have
the problem reported with CONFIG_SCSI_MQ_DEFAULT=y on my primary development
laptop.   :-)

I will say that if you are seeing problems on a particular file system (e.g.
/), by the time the kernel is reporting inconsistencies, the damage is already
done. Yes, you might want to try doing a backup before you reboot, in case the
system doesn't come back, but realistically speaking, the longer you keep
running, the problems are more likely to compound.

So from a personally very selfish perspective, I'm hoping someone who has
already suffered corruption problems is willing to try either 4.19.3, or
disabling CONFIG_SCSI_MQ_DEFAULT, or both, and report that they are no longer
seeing problems, than my putting my own personal data at risk....

Maybe over T-day weekend, I'll try doing a full backup, and then try using
4.19.3 on my personal laptop --- but a "it works fine for me" report won't
necessarily mean anything, since to date I'm not able to reproduce the problem
on one of my systems.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.