linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] first batch of ufs fixes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2017 14:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Richard Narron <comet.berkeley@...il.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] first batch of ufs fixes

On Tue, 13 Jun 2017, Al Viro wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 05:54:06PM -0700, Richard Narron wrote:
>
>> Earlier today I could not reproduce the OpenBSD 6.1 ufs1 fsck error after
>> Linux 4.12-rc5 copy of my >2GB file using "cp".
>>
>> But later today I get the error when I copy using your "dd" method...
>>
>> In any case I always get a ufs1 fsck error after the Linux rm and rmdir.
>
> Interesting...  Could you put together an image (starting with zeroing the
> device before newfs, and ideally with dd from /dev/zero to create files)
> that would
> 	a) pass fsck on OpenBSD
> 	b) after rm on Linux fail the same
> then convert it to qcow2 and publish?  Or just compress it - all free and
> data blocks would contain only zeroes, so any kind of compression (gzip,
> bzip2, whatever) would reduce the size to something more managable...

I created a gzip and sent you an email with the link to a UFS1 OpenBSD 
filesytem image.

I finished simple testing of UFS1 with FreeBSD and NetBSD and found no 
problems except for the differences between "available" blocks in df 
commands.

And testing UFS2 was fine with all 3 systems, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and 
NetBSD.