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  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]
Date:   Wed, 18 Aug 2021 16:26:01 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <>
To:     Boyang Xue <>
Cc:, Jan Kara <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: regression test for "tune2fs -l" after ext4

On Wed 18-08-21 21:20:44, Boyang Xue wrote:
> > > +
> > > +# real QA test starts here
> > > +_supported_fs ext4
> >
> > I'm wondering if this case can be a generic case, there's nothing
> > ext4 specified operations, except this line:
> >
> >
> > Hmm... if we can change this line to something likes _get_fs_super(),
> > it might help to make this test to be a generic test.
> I think this bug is heavily related to "tune2fs", ext4 only. So I
> guess an ext4 only test is enough?

FWIW I agree with Boyang here. For this test to make sense for any other
filesystem other the filesystem would need to read fs metadata through
buffer cache in _get_fs_super(). Furthermore it is somewhat ext2/3/4
specific (due to historical reasons) that reading superblock from the
buffer cache of a mounted filesystem is expected to result in something
sensible. Usually this is plain unsupported use...

Jan Kara <>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists