Re: [PATCH] xfs: test dir/attr hash when loading module

[Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 09:48:26AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> From: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>
> 
> Back in the 6.2-rc1 days, Eric Whitney reported a fstests regression in
> ext4 against generic/454.  The cause of this test failure was the
> unfortunate combination of setting an xattr name containing UTF8 encoded
> emoji, an xattr hash function that accepted a char pointer with no
> explicit signedness, signed type extension of those chars to an int, and
> the 6.2 build tools maintainers deciding to mandate -funsigned-char
> across the board.  As a result, the ondisk extended attribute structure
> written out by 6.1 and 6.2 were not the same.
> 
> This discrepancy, in fact, had been noticeable if a filesystem with such
> an xattr were moved between any two architectures that don't employ the
> same signedness of a raw "char" declaration.  The only reason anyone
> noticed is that x86 gcc defaults to signed, and no such -funsigned-char
> update was made to e2fsprogs, so e2fsck immediately started reporting
> data corruption.
> 
> After a day and a half of discussing how to handle this use case (xattrs
> with bit 7 set anywhere in the name) without breaking existing users,
> Linus merged his own patch and didn't tell the mailing list.  None of
> the developers noticed until AUTOSEL made an announcement.
> 
> In the end, this problem could have been detected much earlier if there
> had been any useful tests of hash function(s) in use inside ext4 to make
> sure that they always produce the same outputs given the same inputs.
> 
> The XFS dirent/xattr name hash takes a uint8_t*, so I don't think it's
> vulnerable to this problem.  However, let's avoid all this drama by
> adding our own self test to check that the da hash produces the same
> outputs for a static pile of inputs on various platforms.  This will be
> followed up in xfsprogs with a similar patch.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-ext4/Y8bpkm3jA3bDm3eL@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64/
> Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <djwong@kernel.org>

I'm going to trust that your binary tables exercise the hash in the
manner needed because I don't have time right now to manually
decode it. With that caveat, everything else looks fine.

Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com