From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B09C1F54E for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 20:04:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232859AbiHJUEU (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:04:20 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58204 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230433AbiHJUET (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:04:19 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6A8082758 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 13:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 6755 invoked by uid 109); 10 Aug 2022 20:04:18 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 20:04:18 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 15236 invoked by uid 111); 10 Aug 2022 20:04:18 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:04:18 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 16:04:17 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Xavier Morel Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: fsck: BAD_FILEMODE diagnostic broken / never triggers Message-ID: References: <6688857F-B899-4253-933B-0DFE25155D13@masklinn.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6688857F-B899-4253-933B-0DFE25155D13@masklinn.net> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 05:01:34PM +0200, Xavier Morel wrote: > > Note that these are treated with a severity of "warning", so fsck won't > > give a non-zero exit. > > Yeah from what I understand it is classified as a warning already > (just not emitted), like the zero padded filemodes. And that can be > upgraded to error using fsck.msgid=error so shouldn't be an issue. Right. > > I think it still enough for transfer.fsckObjects > > to mark them. I kind of wonder if fixing this at this point might create > > more problems than it solves though (e.g., if people have broken modes > > in historical objects that servers may now reject). > > Maybe downgrade to info or ignore by default then? It might still be > an issue for people who wilfully upgraded the diagnostic to error > hoping to catch the, but hopefully if they did that they'd rather get > the notice later than never? Yeah, that may be a sensible resolution. All things being equal I think "warning" is the right level, but out of caution and the historical precedent, maybe downgrading it to "info" is justified. It should be easy to work that into the patch I showed earlier. -Peff