linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.19 52/68] iomap: sub-block dio needs to zeroout beyond EOF

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: <20181129224352.GN19305@dastard>
Date:   Fri, 30 Nov 2018 09:43:52 +1100
From:   Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     sashal@...nel.org, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Luis R. Chamberlain" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.19 52/68] iomap: sub-block dio needs to zeroout
 beyond EOF

On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 02:36:50PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > Same again - what's the test plan for these cherry-picked data
> > corruption fixes?
> >
> 
> Dave,
> 
> Just to check if we are on the same page, if this was the test plan:
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-xfs/msg20639.html
> 
> Would "no regressions from baseline" have been sufficient to validate
> those specific patches are solid for stable?

No, not in this case, because fsx in fstests only does 100k ops at
most - it's a smoke test. This isn't sufficient to regression test
fixes that, in some cases, took hundreds of millions of fsx ops to
expose.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com