linux-kernel - Re: sysfs root link count broken in 2.6.22-git5

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:36:52 -0700
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: sysfs root link count broken in 2.6.22-git5

On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 01:12:55PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 20:48:44 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 12:42:32PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > I'm running 2.6.22-git5 and noticed that the link count of the sysfs
> > > root is broken:
> > > 
> > > $ ls -ld /sys
> > > drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jul 15 12:27 /sys
> > > 
> > > sysfs is mounted, the link count should be 11, and is with kernel
> > > 2.6.22.1. find(1) complains about the bad link count.
> > 
> > I suggest updating your version of find(1), I get no such complaint
> > with:
> > 	$ find --version
> > 	GNU find version 4.3.8
> > 	Built using GNU gnulib version 2007-05-26
> > 	Features enabled: D_TYPE O_NOFOLLOW(enabled) LEAF_OPTIMISATION FTS() CBO(level=0)
> > 
> > What are you using?
> 
> $ find --version
> GNU find version 4.2.28
> Features enabled: D_TYPE O_NOFOLLOW(enabled) LEAF_OPTIMISATION
> 
> This is the standard version in openSuse 10.2. But how does it matter?

Well, some people feel that that message from find is not something that
should be bothering users all the time.  Hence it was fixed in newer
versions.

> sysfs is broken, not find(1). Don't you see the sysfs root link count
> at 2 as I do? This needs to be fixed.

I'm not disagreeing with that, but other than find, what is the downside
of this not being correct?  And what should it be?

thanks,

greg k-h
-
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/