linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

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:	Mon, 19 Mar 2007 17:06:57 -0500
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...elEye.com>
To:	Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
	Andreas Steinmetz <ast@...dv.de>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.20.3: kernel BUG at mm/slab.c:597 try#2

On Mon, 2007-03-19 at 17:47 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> James, could this also be the cause of a tar based backup going crazy and 
> thinking all data is new under any 2.6.21-rc* kernel I've tested so far 
> with amanda, which in my case uses tar?  I've tried the fedora patched 
> tar-1.15-1, and one I hand built right after 1.15-1 came out over a year 
> ago, and they both do it, but only when booted to a 2.6.21-rc* kernel.
> 
> This obviously will be a show-stopper, either for amanda (and by 
> inference, any app that uses tar), or for the migration of an amanda 
> users machinery to a 2.6.21 kernel.

Er, I don't think so .. that sounds like mtime miscompare, which is
either a problem with the filesystem or a problem with the way mtime is
stored in the tar archive.

James


-
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/