linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/4] dax: Check for data cache aliasing at runtime

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 15:18:36 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
 Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
 Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
 dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/4] dax: Check for data cache aliasing at runtime

On 2024-02-02 15:14, Dan Williams wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> [..]
>>> Thanks for that. All of those need to be done before the fs goes live
>>> later in virtio_device_ready(), but before that point nothing should be
>>> calling into virtio_fs_dax_ops, so as far as I can see it is safe to
>>> change the order.
>>
>> Sounds good, I'll do that.
>>
>> I will soon be ready to send out a RFC v4, which is still only
>> compiled-tested. Do you happen to have some kind of test suite
>> you can use to automate some of the runtime testing ?
> 
> There is a test suite for the pmem, dm, and dax changes
> (https://github.com/pmem/ndctl?tab=readme-ov-file#unit-tests), but not
> automated unfortunately. The NVDIMM maintainer team will run that before
> pushing patches out to the fixes branch if you just want to lean on
> that. For the rest I think we will need to depend on tested-by's from
> s390 + virtio_fs folks, and / or sufficient soak time in linux-next.

I suspect this will be necessary. There are just so many combinations
of architectures, drivers and filesystems involved here that I don't
think it is realistic to try to do all this testing manually on my own.

I prefer to voice this up front, so there are no misplaced expectations
about testing.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com