linux-kernel - Re: Analyzed/Solved: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:24:20 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Martin Knoblauch <knobi@...bisoft.de>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	tigran aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Analyzed/Solved: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow


----- Original Message ----

> From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>; Martin Knoblauch <knobi@...bisoft.de>; Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; tigran aivazian <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 2:08:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Analyzed/Solved: Booting 2.6.30-rc2-git7 very slow
> 
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 01:17:55AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
> > > > > Questions remains: was this intentional? It breaks existing userspace 
> and should therefore be considered a regression - right? On the other hand, it 
> will never be a problem for RHEL-4/5 kernels, unless the change in 2.6.29 gets 
> backported. Any ideas?
> > > > 
> > > > afaik that was unintentional and was probably a mistake.
> > > > 
> > > > I wonder how we did that.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > [hotplug]# grep sysfs /proc/mounts
> > > > none /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
> > > > /sys /sys sysfs rw,relatime 0 0
> > > 
> > > ___(I wonder how the heck that is accomplished)
> > 
> > Beats me.  I'm not seeing likely changes in fs/proc/base.c or around
> > show_mountinfo().  Maybe sysfs broke in an ingenious way.  (hopefully
> > cc's viro).
> 
> Er...  Somebody mounting sysfs twice?  From some init script and from
> /etc/fstab, perhaps?  That definitely looks like two mount(2) had to
> have been done to cause that...

 One definitely comes from /etc/fstab, but I am not aware of any other script mounting sysfs in my userspace.

Cheers
Martin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/