[LTP] [PATCH] statvfs01: Convert to new LTP API

[Li Wang]

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 7:09 PM Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Li Wang <liwang@redhat.com> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 7:42 PM Avinesh Kumar <akumar@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> >  Also I've removed the TINFO statements, I'm not sure if only
> >  printing the data in logs is helpful in anyway.
> >
> > Removing the printing is OK, but I am just wondering that
> > can we find a way to check if the returned value in 'buf' is
> > indeed correct?
> >
> > As you can see the ‘struct statvfs‘ includes many fs key
> > values that we need to trust when using them.
> >
> > struct statvfs {
> >         unsigned long  f_bsize;    /* Filesystem block size */
> >         unsigned long  f_frsize;   /* Fragment size */
> >         fsblkcnt_t     f_blocks;   /* Size of fs in f_frsize units */
> >         fsblkcnt_t     f_bfree;    /* Number of free blocks */
> >         fsblkcnt_t     f_bavail;   /* Number of free blocks for
> >                                              unprivileged users */
> >         fsfilcnt_t     f_files;    /* Number of inodes */
> >         fsfilcnt_t     f_ffree;    /* Number of free inodes */
> >         fsfilcnt_t     f_favail;   /* Number of free inodes for
> >                                              unprivileged users */
> >         unsigned long  f_fsid;     /* Filesystem ID */
> >         unsigned long  f_flag;     /* Mount flags */
> >         unsigned long  f_namemax;  /* Maximum filename length */
> >  };
>
> I suppose previously printing the values at least accessed the memory.
>

Sounds reasonable.



> Actually validating the values could be a separate patch though.
>

+1 Absolutely.



>
> We (probably) know that maximum filename should be less than 255 chars
> (for e.g.), but I think there is a good chance that trying to validate
> this will result in false positives and stuff we might want to revert.
>

Maybe we can create a concrete size of the device and mount
it with a designated FS (e.g. ext4), then extracting the known FS
data into `struct statvfs` and validating them.

Does this make sense?


-- 
Regards,
Li Wang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/attachments/20221130/d68ef0b5/attachment.htm>