linux-ext4 - Re: generic/456 regression on 5.7-rc1, 1k test case

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: <20200414025213.752F411C04A@d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 08:22:12 +0530
From:   Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Eric Whitney <enwlinux@...il.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: generic/456 regression on 5.7-rc1, 1k test case

Hello Eric,

On 4/14/20 1:42 AM, Eric Whitney wrote:
> I'm seeing consistent failures for generic/456 while running kvm-xfstests' 1k
> test case on 5.7-rc1.  This is with an x86-64 test appliance root file system
> image dated 23 March 2020.
> 
> The test fails when e2fsck reports "inconsistent fs: inode 12, i_size is
> 147456, should be 163840".
> 
> Bisecting 5.7-rc1 identified the following patch as the cause:
> ext4: don't set dioread_nolock by default for blocksize < pagesize
> (626b035b816b).  Reverting the patch in 5.7-rc1 reliably eliminates the test
> failure.
> 

Since you could reliably reproduce it. Could you please try with this
patch and see if this fixes it for you?

https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-ext4/patch/20200331105016.8674-1-jack@suse.cz/

-ritesh