linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] Btrfs: fix sparse warning

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]

Date:	Tue, 5 Aug 2014 14:32:14 -0700
From:	Zach Brown <zab@...bo.net>
To:	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Btrfs: fix sparse warning

> > > Hello Zach,
> > >
> > >     Here's an untested patch which
> >
> > Try testing it.  It's easy with virtualization and xfstests.
> >
> > You'll find that sending to a file fails because each individual file
> > write call that makes up a send starts at offset 0 -- at the start of
> > the file.
> >
> > Getting this right means getting the semantics around updating the send
> > descriptors f_pos right.  It requires having a bit of a think about send
> > semantics and f_pos update locking.
> 
> Thanks for those informations Zach,
> 
> I've tried btrfs test scripts related to ioctl in xfstests (tests/btrfs/025,
> 035, 052, 055)
> but was not able to trigger that problem. Do I have to create another script,
> use some generic one
> or maybe use big test/scratch devices ?

No idea, sorry.  Maybe your patch is fine and I'm a dummy.  Maybe you
didn't test the kernel you thought you were testing.  Maybe the test
doesn't test what you changed.  You'll have to do some investigating to
find out.

- z
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/