linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] xfs/539: Skip noattr2 remount option on v5 filesystems

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: <7167ad8b-d96e-4864-ac51-48b847a17102@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 15:38:47 +0530
From: "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" <nirjhar.roy.lists@...il.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: fstests@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, ritesh.list@...il.com, ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com,
 djwong@...nel.org, zlang@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] xfs/539: Skip noattr2 remount option on v5
 filesystems


On 2/13/25 02:31, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 12:39:56PM +0000, Nirjhar Roy (IBM) wrote:
>> This test is to verify that repeated warnings are not printed
>> for default options (attr2, noikeep) and warnings are
>> printed for non default options (noattr2, ikeep). Remount
>> with noattr2 fails on a v5 filesystem, so skip the mount option.
> Why do we care if remount succeeds or fails? That's not what the
> test is exercising.
>
> i.e. We are testing to see if the appropriate deprecation warning
> for a deprecated mount option has been issued or not, and that
> should happen regardless of whether the mount option is valid or not
> for the given filesysetm format....

Okay, thank you for the clarification. Also, based on your response on 
patch 3/3, remount with noattr2(or any other invalid remount options), 
should be silently ignored, so this patch won't be necessary. However, 
we have observed failure of the test xfs/539 because remount with 
noattr2 was failing with CONFIG_XFS_SUPPORT_V4=n on v5 xfs and this 
failure looks like a kernel bug. More on this on my reply[1] to your 
comments on patch 3/3.

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/b43e4cd9-d8aa-4cc0-a5ff-35f2e0553682@gmail.com/

>
> Hence I don't see any reason for changing the test to exclude
> noattr2 testing on v5 filesystems...
>
> -Dave.

-- 
Nirjhar Roy
Linux Kernel Developer
IBM, Bangalore