linux-kernel - Re: [syzbot] [hfs?] WARNING in hfs_write

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: <FE018F29-9CBB-471B-AB93-C4701AD9C4B1@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 07:42:46 +0100
From:   Kirsten Bromilow <kirsten1@...il.com>
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     Finn Thain <fthain@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Viacheslav Dubeyko <slava@...eyko.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        syzbot <syzbot+7bb7cd3595533513a9e7@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        christian.brauner@...ntu.com,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
        ZhangPeng <zhangpeng362@...wei.com>,
        linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org,
        debian-ports <debian-ports@...ts.debian.org>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [hfs?] WARNING in hfs_write_inode

Please stop sending these emails to me and remove me from the recipient list?
!

Sent from my iPhone

> On 21 Jul 2023, at 02:27, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 11:03:28AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Jul 2023, Dave Chinner wrote:
>> 
>>>> I suspect that this is one of those catch-22 situations: distros are 
>>>> going to enable every feature under the sun. That doesn't mean that 
>>>> anyone is actually _using_ them these days.
>> 
>> I think the value of filesystem code is not just a question of how often 
>> it gets executed -- it's also about retaining access to the data collected 
>> in archives, museums, galleries etc. that is inevitably held in old 
>> formats.
> 
> That's an argument for adding support to tar, not for maintaining
> read/write support.
> 
>>> We need to much more proactive about dropping support for unmaintained 
>>> filesystems that nobody is ever fixing despite the constant stream of 
>>> corruption- and deadlock- related bugs reported against them.
>> 
>> IMO, a stream of bug reports is not a reason to remove code (it's a reason 
>> to revert some commits).
>> 
>> Anyway, that stream of bugs presumably flows from the unstable kernel API, 
>> which is inherently high-maintenance. It seems that a stable API could be 
>> more appropriate for any filesystem for which the on-disk format is fixed 
>> (by old media, by unmaintained FLOSS implementations or abandoned 
>> proprietary implementations).
> 
> You've misunderstood.  Google have decided to subject the entire kernel
> (including obsolete unmaintained filesystems) to stress tests that it's
> never had before.  IOW these bugs have been there since the code was
> merged.  There's nothing to back out.  There's no API change to blame.
> It's always been buggy and it's never mattered before.
> 
> It wouldn't be so bad if Google had also decided to fund people to fix
> those bugs, but no, they've decided to dump them on public mailing lists
> and berate developers into fixing them.
>