linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] test-appliance: add ext4/050 to encrypt.exclude

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yb6vbf6M+EYMXvQG@mit.edu>
Date:   Sat, 18 Dec 2021 23:05:01 -0500
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Leah Rumancik <leah.rumancik@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test-appliance: add ext4/050 to encrypt.exclude

On Sat, Dec 18, 2021 at 08:21:06PM -0600, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 11:08:14PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > The ext4/050 test can't handle encrypted directories, so skip it for
> > now.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
> > ---
> >  .../test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/cfg/encrypt.exclude    | 5 +++++
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kvm-xfstests/test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/cfg/encrypt.exclude b/kvm-xfstests/test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/cfg/encrypt.exclude
> > index f3c7a959..21a8b45f 100644
> > --- a/kvm-xfstests/test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/cfg/encrypt.exclude
> > +++ b/kvm-xfstests/test-appliance/files/root/fs/ext4/cfg/encrypt.exclude
> > @@ -12,6 +12,11 @@ ext4/028
> >  # file systems with encryption enabled can't be mounted with ext3
> >  ext4/044
> >  
> > +# This test to make sure ext4 directory entries are appropriately
> > +# wiped after a file is deleted, or after htree operations is
> > +# incompatible with an encrypted directory.
> > +ext4/048
> 
> The commit message says ext4/050, but the test added to the list is ext4/048.
> Is ext4/048 the one intended?

Yes, it's the commit message that was incorrect.  Thanks for pointing
that out.  I'll fix the commit description in my tree.

     	   	    	       		   - Ted