linux-kernel - Re: Error returns not handled correctly by sysfs.c:subsys_attr

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, 21 Dec 2007 12:35:26 -0800
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Andrew Patterson <andrew.patterson@...com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <teheo@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Error returns not handled correctly by
	sysfs.c:subsys_attr_store()

On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 02:15:58PM -0700, Andrew Patterson wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 10:07 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Andrew Patterson wrote:
> > > I tried with clean 2.6.24-rc3 and get the same bad behavior.  This is on
> > > an ia64 box, so maybe that is an issue. I can try on an x86 box as well.
> > > Oh, one other thing.  I tried a "uname -r" to make sure I had the
> > > correct kernel booted and got:
> > > 
> > > # uname -r
> > > 2.6.24-rc3
> > > x
> > > y
> > > z
> > > #
> > 
> > Yeah, please try it on another machine from clean tree.  sysfs code is
> > definitely not endian dependent and is 64 bit clean.  Heck, all my test
> > machines run 64 bit these days.  I would be surprised if it's something
> > architecture dependent but please try on a different machine with
> > different userland with kernel built from fresh source tree.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> 
> I tried this on a AMD system running an i386 kernel. I get the same bad
> behavior.  This is from a 2.6.24-rc3 kernel downloaded from kernel.org.
> I ran "make mrproper" followed by "make oldconfig" and accepted all the
> defaults for the config.
> 
> There is one slight change with this experiment.  Other nodes are not
> getting corrupted, i.e., uname -r is getting the correct value.

Are you still seeing this on 2.6.24-rc6?

I still can not duplicate this here :(

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/