Re: [xfstests PATCH] generic/574: test corruption at more offsets

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]



On 2024-06-11 20:53:34, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Expand generic/574 to test for corruption in more different parts of the
> file to try to exercise any hashing optimizations that might be used.
> 
> There is no existing bug that this finds.  This is just to prevent
> future bugs, considering optimizations along the lines of
> https://lore.kernel.org/fsverity/20240611034822.36603-7-ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  tests/generic/574 | 15 +++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tests/generic/574 b/tests/generic/574
> index cb42baaa..72440d49 100755
> --- a/tests/generic/574
> +++ b/tests/generic/574
> @@ -194,10 +194,25 @@ test_block_size()
>  	corruption_test $block_size 131072 0 5
>  	corruption_test $block_size 131072 4091 5
>  	corruption_test $block_size 131072 65536 65536
>  	corruption_test $block_size 131072 131067 5
>  
> +	# Test corrupting a block in files of length 1..4 blocks, and test
> +	# corrupting each block of a 4-block file.  This ensures that all code
> +	# paths that might exist due to multi-block hashing optimizations the
> +	# fsverity implementation may use get covered, assuming no more than 4
> +	# blocks are hashed at once.  E.g., consider an fsverity implementation
> +	# that verifies sets of blocks but has a bug when given a single block,
> +	# or that has a bug that makes it not verify all the blocks of each set.
> +	local i
> +	for i in $(seq 1 4); do
> +		corruption_test $block_size $((i*block_size)) $((block_size/2)) 5
> +	done
> +	for i in $(seq 0 3); do
> +		corruption_test $block_size $((4*block_size)) $((i*block_size)) 5
> +	done
> +
>  	corrupt_eof_block_test $block_size 130999 72
>  
>  	# Merkle tree corruption.
>  	corruption_test $block_size 200000 100 10 true
>  
> 
> base-commit: e46fa3a7dae4a65fd80128bf381dba4fd5036ebb
> -- 
> 2.45.2
> 
> 

The addition looks fine to me, why is it 4 blocks though, isn't 2
enough?

Reviewed-by: Andrey Albershteyn <aalbersh@xxxxxxxxxx>

-- 
- Andrey





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux