linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] Test the new fanotify FAN_FS

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]

Date:   Wed, 2 Feb 2022 15:22:32 +0100
From:   Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
        Matthew Bobrowski <repnop@...gle.com>,
        Ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, kernel@...labora.com,
        Khazhismel Kumykov <khazhy@...gle.com>,
        LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] Test the new fanotify FAN_FS_ERROR event

Hi Amir,

> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 5:16 PM Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz> wrote:

> > Hi all,

> > v5.16 released => patchset merged.
> > Thanks!


> Guys,

> Looks like we have a regression.
> With kernel v5.17-rc1, test fanotify22 blocks on the first test case,
> because the expected ECORRUPTED event on remount,abort is never received.
> The multiple error test cases also fail for the same reason.

> Gabriel,

> Are you aware of any ext4 change that could explain this regression?

> In any case, Petr, I suggest adding a short timeout to the test
> instead of the default 5min.
> Test takes less than 1 second on my VM on v5.16, so...
We usually don't lower the default timeout, but here it's a good idea since here
it blocks. It's similar speed on my machine, but I'd be conservative and put
timeout 10 sec. Sending patch.

Kind regards,
Petr


> Thanks,
> Amir.