linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4/033: test EXT4_IOC_RESIZE

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]

Message-ID: <20220106023506.kwpzkqdpv6hozygk@zlang-mailbox>
Date:   Thu, 6 Jan 2022 10:35:06 +0800
From:   Zorro Lang <zlang@...hat.com>
To:     Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     fstests@...r.kernel.org,
        Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4/033: test EXT4_IOC_RESIZE_FS by calling the ioctl
 directly

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 03:02:58PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2022 at 12:06:19AM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > > This patch looks good to me, I just want to ask if we'd better to try to include
> > > ext2fs/ext2fs.h at here? And of course, check it in configure.ac.
> > > The EXT4_IOC_RESIZE_FS looks like defined in ext2fs/ext2_fs.h which comes from
> > > e2fsprogs-devel package. I can't find this definition from kernel-hearders package.
> > > As you're the expert of this part, please correct me if it's wrong :)
> 
> We're not depending on ext2fs/ext2_fs.h and hence the e2fsprogs-devel
> (or libext2fs-dev package if you're using Debian/Ubuntu) anywhere else
> in the xfstests-dev.  It's not like the code points for
> EXT4_IOC_RESIZE_FS are going to change, so we just use constructs
> like:
> 
> #ifndef EXT4_IOC_RESIZE_FS
> #define EXT4_IOC_RESIZE_FS           _IOW('f', 16, __u64)
> #endif
> 
> in xfstests-dev/src/*.c as needed.
> 
> There's no real upside in adding a dependency which makes it harder
> for developers to compile xfstests.  (Trivia note: I created
> xfstests-bld several years ago because back then, Debian didn't
> include some of the internal header files from xfsprogs which xfstests
> needed.)

Thanks for your kindly explanation.

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 						- Ted
>