linux-kernel - Re: [Fdutils] DMA cache consistency bug introduced in 2.6.28 (Was: Re: Cannot format floppies under kernel 2.6.*?)

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:	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:28:31 -0500
From:	Mark Hounschell <markh@...pro.net>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@....rr.com>, Alain Knaff <alain@...ff.lu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fdutils@...tils.linux.lu
Subject: Re: [Fdutils] DMA cache consistency bug introduced in 2.6.28 (Was:
 Re: Cannot format floppies under kernel 2.6.*?)

On 12/18/2009 10:22 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>>
>> This one doesn't build:
>>
>> CC [M]  fs/ext3/super.o
>> fs/ext3/super.c: In function ‘ext3_quota_on’:
>> fs/ext3/super.c:2839: error: ‘nd’ undeclared (first use in this function)
>> fs/ext3/super.c:2839: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
>> fs/ext3/super.c:2839: error: for each function it appears in.)
>> make[2]: *** [fs/ext3/super.o] Error 1
>> make[1]: *** [fs/ext3] Error 2
>> make: *** [fs] Error 2
>>
>> I haven't yet determined that I can but, if I were to make a modification to the
>> tree now to fix this would that screw up the bisect process?
> 
> You can safely fix unrelated problems without screwing up the bisection. 
> And in this case you can be pretty sure that this is unrelated, so it's 
> all ok.
> 
> The fix for that silly problem is
> 
> -                       path_put(&nd.path);
> +                       path_put(&path);
> 
> (it's due to a silent merge failure - it merged cleanly, but semantics had 
> changed in a branch and impacted code that was newly introduced in another 
> branch).

Yep, thanks. I'm past that now. But haven't done a bisect [good|bad] on the
results of that one yet. Did you see Alain's email response to my bisect
progress report to him?

I'm still at a loss as to how to proceed?

Mark
--
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/