From: "Darrick J. Wong" Subject: Re: more resize breakage Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 23:00:48 -0700 Message-ID: <20140529060048.GB27499@birch.djwong.org> References: <5386C41D.2090006@redhat.com> <20140529052733.GD17413@birch.djwong.org> <5386C5BF.7080202@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ext4 development To: Eric Sandeen Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:29848 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751547AbaE2GAy (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2014 02:00:54 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5386C5BF.7080202@redhat.com> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:29:35AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 5/29/14, 12:27 AM, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:22:37AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> After considering how many resize2fs corruptions we've had, I decided to try to write a resize fuzzer which picks random parameters and sizes, and sees what happens with online & offline grow & offline shrink. When I get it cleaner, I'll send it out to play with. > >> > >> But it is indeed finding resize issues; for example, with e2fsprogs git master & v3.15-rc3, > > > > >> Sad face. :( > > > > D'oh! > > > > /me wonders, is offline grow any better? > > Yes, offline passed. > > > Also I "extended" fsfuzz to corrupt only metadata blocks and made the > > kernel+e2fsck chew through all that crap. The kernel survived, but e2fsck > > seemed to die either failing to allocate blocks to resurrect the journal (bad > > bbitmap) or because of that thing where calling block_iterate on an inline data > > file makes e2fsck abort. > > > > So, uh, ... long live the patchbomb? :( > > yeah. Maybe I (you?) should try my testcase w/ your latest patchbomb. ;) I think I only have patches out for review for e2fsprogs at the moment. I've not put my grubby hands on kernel code in a while. --D > > -Eric >