fstests.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>
Cc: fstests <fstests@vger.kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
	y2038 Mailman List <y2038@lists.linaro.org>,
	Eryu Guan <guaneryu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] generic/402: Make timestamp range check conditional
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 11:01:48 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABeXuvoDnwS5Km657iDwgWVL=L3muqqJp51owc0kkNcTFRrEYw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABeXuvrexoO9y894EXU9vc8=BLvLMB8EgOi2OdxT1hp5xHFPvQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 10:23 AM Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:09 AM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > I understand why you dislike the ext2+loop test, but please hear me out.
> > > >
> > > > From all the fs types that are supported by the test, only btrfs and ext4 with
> > > > large inode size are y2038 ready.
> > > > For the rest of the cases, we actually have a way to detect kernel support
> > > > from the dmesg warning, without the need for hacky ext2 loop mount.
> > > >
> > > > So how about just:
> > > > 1. moving  _scratch_mount before _require_timestamp_range
> > > > 2. in _require_timestamp_range (untested):
> > > >         if [ $tsmax -lt $((1<<32)) ] && ! _check_dmesg_for "supports
> > >
> > > Yeah, this looks fine. I thought about searching for dmesg warning after
> > > _scratch_mount as well, but that would _notrun if the fs is 2038-safe.
> > > This $tsmax check fixes my concern. Thanks!
> > >
> >
> > Deepa,
> >
> > Do you intend to post the simplified version or would you like me
> > to re-spin your patch?
>
> I intend to do this. Sorry, was distracted by other things. FWIW, just
> (1<<32) is not enough. The kernel prints this warning based on
> (current time + max uptime) <= tsmax. Will post this.

Also we are testing for the following timestamps in the test:

declare -a TIMESTAMPS=(
        $tsmin
         0
        $tsmax
        $((tsmax/2))
        $((tsmax+1))
)

So the test can still fail if the above tsmax test passes, but the
limit patches are not in the kernel.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/29/1850 has the limits for all the
filesystems I filled in. fat, cifs, hpfs etc. all fall in this
category.

I do not see a good way of doing this unless we test for a fs that
always fails in a predictable way.

Checking for fsinfo maybe is ok. But, at that point we could just rely
on any syscall that got merged after the limits series isn't it?

-Deepa

  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-17 19:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-19  4:12 [PATCH] generic/402: fix for updated behavior of timestamp limits Deepa Dinamani
2019-07-21 16:47 ` Eryu Guan
2019-10-02 22:06   ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-10-05 18:35 ` Eryu Guan
2019-10-23 22:17   ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-12 13:11 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-12-12 21:55   ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-18 20:21     ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-18 20:46       ` Amir Goldstein
2019-12-19  8:28         ` [Y2038] " Arnd Bergmann
2019-12-19  8:40           ` Greg KH
2019-12-19 11:29             ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-12-19 11:35               ` Greg KH
2019-12-19 15:48               ` Ben Hutchings
2019-12-19 20:35                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2019-12-19 12:09           ` Amir Goldstein
2019-12-20 22:45             ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-23  5:16               ` [PATCH] generic/402: Make timestamp range check conditional Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-23  6:36                 ` Amir Goldstein
2019-12-24  1:15                   ` Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-28 22:13                     ` [PATCH v2] " Deepa Dinamani
2019-12-30  7:34                       ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-03  6:46                         ` Deepa Dinamani
2020-01-03  9:58                           ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-08  8:09                         ` Eryu Guan
2020-01-08  8:45                           ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-08  9:50                             ` Eryu Guan
2020-01-17  9:09                               ` Amir Goldstein
2020-01-17 18:23                                 ` Deepa Dinamani
2020-01-17 19:01                                   ` Deepa Dinamani [this message]
2020-01-19  0:57                                     ` [PATCH v3 1/1] " Deepa Dinamani
2020-01-19  9:19                                       ` Amir Goldstein
2020-02-01  9:14                                         ` Eryu Guan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CABeXuvoDnwS5Km657iDwgWVL=L3muqqJp51owc0kkNcTFRrEYw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=deepa.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=fstests@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=guaneryu@gmail.com \
    --cc=sashal@kernel.org \
    --cc=y2038@lists.linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).