From: hsiangkao@gmx.com (Gao Xiang)
Subject: [PATCH] erofs: move erofs out of staging
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 02:16:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190818181654.GA1617@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190818174702.GA17633@infradead.org>
Hi Hch,
On Sun, Aug 18, 2019@10:47:02AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2019@10:29:38AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > Not sure what you're even disagreeing with, as I *do* expect new filesystems to
> > be held to a high standard, and to be written with the assumption that the
> > on-disk data may be corrupted or malicious. We just can't expect the bar to be
> > so high (e.g. no bugs) that it's never been attained by *any* filesystem even
> > after years/decades of active development. If the developers were careful, the
> > code generally looks robust, and they are willing to address such bugs as they
> > are found, realistically that's as good as we can expect to get...
>
> Well, the impression I got from Richards quick look and the reply to it is
> that there is very little attempt to validate the ondisk data structure
> and there is absolutely no priority to do so. Which is very different
> from there is a bug or two here and there.
As my second reply to Richard, I didn't fuzz all the on-disk fields for EROFS.
and as my reply to Richard / Greg, current EROFS is used on the top of dm-verity.
I cannot say how well EROFS will be performed on malformed images (and you can
also find the bug richard pointed out is a miswritten break->continue by myself).
I posted the upstream EROFS post on July 4, 2019 and a month and a half later,
no one can tell me (yes, thanks for kind people reply me about their suggestion)
what we should do next (you can see these emails, I sent many times) to meet
the minimal upstream requirements and rare people can even dip into my code.
That is all I want to say. I will work on autofuzz these days, and I want to
know how to meet your requirements on this (you can tell us your standard,
how well should we do).
OK, you don't reply to my post once, I have no idea how to get your first reply.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-18 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-17 8:23 [PATCH] erofs: move erofs out of staging Gao Xiang
2019-08-17 21:19 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-17 22:07 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-17 23:25 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-17 23:38 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 0:04 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 0:52 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 8:16 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-18 8:45 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 9:03 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-18 9:09 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-08-18 9:21 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-18 10:12 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-18 15:11 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-08-18 15:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-18 16:16 ` Eric Biggers
2019-08-18 16:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-18 16:33 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 17:29 ` Eric Biggers
2019-08-18 17:47 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-18 18:16 ` Gao Xiang [this message]
2019-08-18 20:14 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 7:35 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-19 8:02 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 0/6] staging: erofs: first stage of corrupted compressed images Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 1/6] staging: erofs: some compressed cluster should be submitted for corrupted images Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 14:36 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-19 14:39 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 2/6] staging: erofs: cannot set EROFS_V_Z_INITED_BIT if fill_inode_lazy fails Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 14:43 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 3/6] staging: erofs: add two missing erofs_workgroup_put for corrupted images Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 14:40 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 4/6] staging: erofs: avoid loop in submit chains Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 14:50 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 5/6] staging: erofs: detect potential multiref due to corrupted images Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 14:57 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-21 2:19 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-08-19 10:34 ` [PATCH 6/6] staging: erofs: avoid endless loop of invalid lookback distance 0 Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 14:58 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-19 16:09 ` [PATCH] erofs: move erofs out of staging Darrick J. Wong
2019-08-19 20:30 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-20 0:55 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-08-20 1:55 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-20 2:24 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-20 2:38 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-08-20 7:15 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-20 8:46 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-08-21 2:12 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-20 15:56 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-08-20 16:35 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-21 0:51 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-08-21 1:34 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-21 1:48 ` Darrick J. Wong
2019-08-21 1:57 ` Chao Yu
2019-08-20 3:33 ` Miao Xie
2019-08-20 3:46 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-20 6:04 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-08-20 6:22 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 7:37 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-18 17:43 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-08-18 16:03 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 17:06 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-18 17:46 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2019-08-18 18:00 ` Richard Weinberger
2019-08-18 18:31 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-18 9:28 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 5:28 ` [PATCH] erofs: Use common kernel logging style Joe Perches
2019-08-19 5:52 ` Gao Xiang
2019-08-19 5:47 ` Joe Perches
2019-08-19 6:08 ` Gao Xiang
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=20190818181654.GA1617@hsiangkao-HP-ZHAN-66-Pro-G1 \
--to=hsiangkao@gmx.com \
/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).