linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v3 05/13] generic/1226: Add atomic write test using fio crc check verifier

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: <b270bb66-721e-4433-adaf-fe5ae100ca6e@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 15:06:01 +0100
From: John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>
To: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Zorro Lang <zlang@...hat.com>, fstests@...r.kernel.org,
        Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@...il.com>, djwong@...nel.org,
        tytso@....edu, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/13] generic/1226: Add atomic write test using fio
 crc check verifier

On 17/07/2025 14:52, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 02:00:18PM +0100, John Garry wrote:
>> On 12/07/2025 15:12, Ojaswin Mujoo wrote:
>>> From: "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>
>>>
>>> This adds atomic write test using fio based on it's crc check verifier.
>>> fio adds a crc for each data block. If the underlying device supports atomic
>>> write then it is guaranteed that we will never have a mix data from two
>>> threads writing on the same physical block.
>>
>> I think that you should mention that 2-phase approach.
> 
> Sure I can add a comment and update the commit message with this.
> 
>>
>> Is there something which ensures that we have fio which supports RWF_ATOMIC?
>> fio for some time supported the "atomic" cmdline param, but did not do
>> anything until recently
> 
> We do have _require_fio which ensures the options passed are supported
> by the current fio. If you are saying some versions of fio have --atomic
> valid but dont do an RWF_ATOMIC then I'm not really sure if that can be
> caught though.

Can you check the fio version?

> 
>>
>>>
>>> Co-developed-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ojaswin Mujoo <ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>    tests/generic/1226     | 101 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    tests/generic/1226.out |   2 +
>>
>> Was this tested with xfs?
> 
> Yes, I've tested with XFS with software fallback as well. Also, tested
> xfs while keeping io size as 16kb so we stress the hw paths too.

so is that requirement implemented with the 
_require_scratch_write_atomic check?

> Both
> seem to be passing as expected.
>>