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:   Fri, 22 Jul 2022 23:11:14 +0800
From:   Zorro Lang <>
To:     Sun Ke <>
Cc:     Theodore Ts'o <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] ext4: resize fs after resize_inode without e2fsck

On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 07:51:57AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 04:16:26PM +0800, Sun Ke wrote:
> > 
> > 1. The test run fsck automatically, and complain inconsistent´╝îI think it
> > need not run fsck.
> The check script always run fscks after the test.  In order to
> suppress the fsck complaint, we'll need to add this after the
> resize2fs invocation:
> _scratch_unmount
> $DEBUGFS_PROG -w -R "set_super_value s_reserved_gdt_blocks 0" $SCRATCH_DEV \
>         >>$seqres.full 2>&1
> This resets the s_reserved_gdt_blocks field back to zero, so the fsck
> doesn't fail.  Which is fine, because the point of the test is to see
> whether the kernel dereferences a NULL pointer or not.

Or maybe just replace _reuqire_scratch with _require_scratch_nocheck, if we
corrupt the fs on SCRATCH_DEV intentionally?


> > 2. It warn missing kernel fix, but the commit had merged.
> The way _fixed_by_kernel_commit works is if the test fails (for any
> reason), it prints that you MAY be missing the bugfix commit:
> > HINT: You _MAY_ be missing kernel fix:
> >       b55c3cd102a6 ext4: add reserved GDT blocks check
> 		     	       		- Ted

Powered by blists - more mailing lists