linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] generic/204: remove unnecessary _scratch

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: <20220211020734.x7nxgvdl4ltesjb2@shindev>
Date:   Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:07:35 +0000
From:   Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@....com>
To:     "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
CC:     "fstests@...r.kernel.org" <fstests@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        Naohiro Aota <Naohiro.Aota@....com>,
        Johannes Thumshirn <Johannes.Thumshirn@....com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] generic/204: remove unnecessary _scratch_mkfs call

On Feb 09, 2022 / 14:31, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 09:33:01PM +0900, Shin'ichiro Kawasaki wrote:
> > The test case generic/204 calls _scratch_mkfs to get data block size and
> > i-node size of the filesystem and obtained data block size is passed to
> > the following _scratch_mfks_sized call as an option. However, the
> > _scratch_mkfs call is unnecessary since the sizes can be obtained by
> > _scratch_mkfs_sized call without the data block size option.
> > 
> > Also the _scratch_mkfs call is harmful when the _scratch_mkfs succeeds
> > and the _scratch_mkfs_sized fails. In this case, the _scratch_mkfs
> > leaves valid working filesystem on scratch device then following mount
> > and IO operations can not detect the failure of _scratch_mkfs_sized.
> > This results in the test case run with unexpected test condition.
> > 
> > Hence, remove the _scratch_mkfs call and the data block size option for
> > _scratch_mkfs_sized call.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@....com>
> 
> Looks ok, assuming you've verified that fstests with FSTYP=xfs doesn't
> regress...
> 
> Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@...nel.org>

Thanks for reviewing. I tested the test case with FSTYP=xfs on a few devices and
3 variety of MKFS_OPTIONS (no option, "-b size=1024 -i size=512" and
"-b size=4096 -i size=2048") and all passed. Also I ran whole fstests with
FSTYP=xfs, and confirmed that this change does not cause additional failure.

-- 
Best Regards,
Shin'ichiro Kawasaki