From: "Darrick J. Wong" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: Amir Goldstein <email@example.com> Cc: Eryu Guan <firstname.lastname@example.org>, linux-xfs <email@example.com>, fstests <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Deepa Dinamani <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] generic: check userspace handling of extreme timestamps Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:59:02 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20201029215902.GL1061252@magnolia> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAOQ4uxjZ7tpkJAXVHWvj5M0G4QM4vSeQ+GXszSij7wVbePJdXw@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:40:00PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:02 PM Darrick J. Wong > <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 12:34:57PM +0200, Amir Goldstein wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 10:25 PM Darrick J. Wong > > > <email@example.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Darrick J. Wong <firstname.lastname@example.org> > > > > > > > > These two tests ensure we can store and retrieve timestamps on the > > > > extremes of the date ranges supported by userspace, and the common > > > > places where overflows can happen. > > > > > > > > They differ from generic/402 in that they don't constrain the dates > > > > tested to the range that the filesystem claims to support; we attempt > > > > various things that /userspace/ can parse, and then check that the vfs > > > > clamps and persists the values correctly. > > > > > > So this test will fail when run on stable kernels before the vfs > > > clamping changes > > > and there is no require_* to mitigate that failure. > > > > Yes, that is the intended outcome. Those old kernels silently truncate > > the high bits from those timestamps when inodes are flushed to disk, and > > the only user-visible evidence of this comes much later when the system > > reboots and suddenly the timestamps are wrong. Clamping also seems a > > little strange, but at least it's immediately obvious. > > > > It is very surprising that you could set a timestamp of 2 Apr 2500 on > > ext2, ls your shiny futuristic timestamp, reboot, and have it become > > 5 Nov 1955. Only Marty McFly would be amused. > > > > OK. So we can call it a bug in old kernels that is not going to be fixed > in stable updates. The minimum we can do for stable kernel testers is > provide a decent way to exclude the tests for clamping. > > I guess 'check -x bigtime' is decent enough. > I might have named the group 'timelimit' but I can live with 'bigtime'. > > So with fix for the rest of my minor nits, you may add: Ok, I've fixed them all. I also added warnings to 721 and 722 that the test is expected to fail on pre-5.4 kernels. Thanks for reviewing! --D > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <email@example.com> > > Thanks, > Amir.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-29 21:59 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-10-27 19:03 [PATCH RFC v6 0/4] xfstests: widen timestamps to deal with y2038+ Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-27 19:04 ` [PATCH 1/4] generic: check userspace handling of extreme timestamps Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-29 10:34 ` Amir Goldstein 2020-10-29 21:00 ` Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-29 21:40 ` Amir Goldstein 2020-10-29 21:59 ` Darrick J. Wong [this message] 2020-10-27 19:04 ` [PATCH 2/4] xfs/122: add legacy timestamps to ondisk checker Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-29 11:28 ` Amir Goldstein 2020-10-29 18:28 ` Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-27 19:04 ` [PATCH 3/4] xfs: detect time limits from filesystem Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-29 10:47 ` Amir Goldstein 2020-10-29 18:27 ` Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-29 18:56 ` Amir Goldstein 2020-10-27 19:04 ` [PATCH 4/4] xfs: test upgrading filesystem to bigtime Darrick J. Wong 2020-10-29 13:06 ` Amir Goldstein 2020-10-29 18:22 ` Darrick J. Wong 2021-03-31 1:08 [PATCHSET 0/4] fstests: widen timestamps to deal with y2038+ Darrick J. Wong 2021-03-31 1:08 ` [PATCH 1/4] generic: check userspace handling of extreme timestamps Darrick J. Wong 2021-04-21 0:23 [PATCHSET v4 0/4] fstests: widen timestamps to deal with y2038+ Darrick J. Wong 2021-04-21 0:23 ` [PATCH 1/4] generic: check userspace handling of extreme timestamps Darrick J. Wong 2021-04-22 21:16 ` Allison Henderson 2021-04-23 1:07 ` Darrick J. Wong
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=20201029215902.GL1061252@magnolia \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/4] generic: check userspace handling of extreme timestamps' \ /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
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).