fstests: copy_file_range() bounds testing
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest3 patches 15 repliesIn review
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
| # | Subject and files | Size | Replies | Applied |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1/3 | common: add _require_test_swapfilecommon/ tests/ tests/ +2 more | +21 | 3 replies | |
| 2/3 | generic/43[014]: copy_range beyond source EOF should failtests/ tests/ tests/ +4 more | +15 | 4 replies | |
| 3/3 | generic: copy_file_range bounds testtests/ tests/ tests/ | +228 | 7 replies |
Reviews trailers per patch
2 of 3 patches have a Reviewed-by or Acked-by.
| Patch | Darrick J. Wong |
|---|---|
| 1/3 | R-b |
| 2/3 | R-b |
| 3/3 |
Trailers given in replies are filled; those carried in the patches from earlier versions are outlined with dashes.
Cover letter [PATCH 0/3] fstests: copy_file_range() bounds testing
Hi folks,
We suck at bounds testing new system calls. This is a test that exercises the expected failure cases for copy_file_range(). It's going to fail miserably on existing kernels - I'm about to post a series of fixes to linux-fsdevel that make this test pass.
The test is also dependent on xfs_io changes that I posted a few hours ago. The three (not 2!) patches can be found here:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=154378403323889&w=2
https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=154378403523890&w=2
https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=154378403323888&w=2
https://marc.info/?l=linux-xfs&m=154379644526132&w=2
Comments welcome.
-Dave
---
As an aside, one thing that I've discovered in writing this test is that certain things we do to test certain file conditions are not being tested corectly. e.g. immutable files.
When we set a file as immutable and then go to modify it with xfs_io like this:
# xfs_io -c "chattr +i" test_file # xfs_io -c "pwrite 0 4k" test_file
We are not actually testing whether the pwrite() syscall detected that it can't write to an immutable file. xfs_io actually fails when the open(O_RDWR) syscall fails because we can't open an immutable file for writing. IOWs, it's not testing pwrite() at all.
Hence tests like generic/159 and generic/160 are not actually testing whether cloning/deduping files fails on immutable files.
Instead, what we need to do is open the file O_RDWR, then set the file immutable, then perform the modification operation. i.e. this:
# xfs_io -c "chattr +i" -c "pwrite 0 4k" test_file
Will exercise the pwrite() syscall hitting an immutable file. A similar thing happens with trying to write/modify to read only files
- the open() call fails, not the call that we want to test. That's why I added the "chmod" operation to xfs_io, to allow us to open a file for write, then turn it read only while we still have a writeable fd open. This then exercises trying to write/modify a read-only file.
I'm sure there's lots of tests that have these problems. I don't have time to audit them right now, but I'm bringing it up so that people are aware of the issue and at least catch problems like this in new tests....