linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH REPOST blktests v2 2/9] nvme: Do not hard code device size for dd test

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, 2 May 2023 14:54:52 +0200
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
To:     Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@....com>
Cc:     "linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>,
        Shin'ichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro@...tmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH REPOST blktests v2 2/9] nvme: Do not hard code device
 size for dd test

> > -	dd if=/dev/urandom of="/dev/${nvmedev}n1" count=128000 bs=4k status=none
> > +	size="$(blockdev --getsize64 "/dev/${nvmedev}n1")"
> > +	bs="$(blockdev --getbsz "/dev/${nvmedev}n1")"
> > +	count=$((size / bs - 1))
> 
> Do we need -1?

Not really. My aim was to just to make it test case a bit more
reliable. The original test didn't fill up the disk either.

I am going to drop it.