linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v5] ext4/056: add a check to make sure ext4 uuid ioctls get/set during fsstress.

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: <YtgfevC8CnGaZpQ5@mit.edu>
Date:   Wed, 20 Jul 2022 11:30:02 -0400
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Zorro Lang <zlang@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jeremy Bongio <bongiojp@...il.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        fstests@...r.kernel.org, "Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ext4/056: add a check to make sure ext4 uuid ioctls
 get/set during fsstress.

On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 11:06:36PM +0800, Zorro Lang wrote:
> > The kill -9 is needed, because otherwise the test will run for a
> > **very** long time.  The reason for it is because of the -n 999999 in
> 
> Sure, I mean:
> 
>   kill -9 $fsstress_pid 2>/dev/null
>   wait
> 
> Not remove the "kill" line :)

Ah yes, sorry, I misunderstood what you meant.

> > Also, Jeremy, it looks like you haven't updated your xfstests-dev
> > repository in a few weeks.  Since you started this project, ext4/056
> > has been assigned, and there has been some new helper programs added
> > which caused patch conflicts in src/Makefile and in .gitignore.  They
> > were pretty trivial to fix up the patch conflicts (which I've done in
> > my xfstests-dev tree), but it's best practice to rebase on top of
> > origin/for-next and re-test just to make sure there haven't been some
> > major change in the fstests common scripts that might catch your test
> > out.
> 
> Thanks for pointing out that, yes, better to rebase to latest fstests
> for-next branch.

Jeremy, for your convenience, my version of the change which is
rebased on for-next, fixes the merge conflicts and uses ext4/057
instead of ext4/056 can be found here:

https://github.com/tytso/xfstests/commit/330bf72dc67dd39e0fd413ecea78ab18b5405fb9

							- Ted