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]
Message-Id: <200911172323.11224.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2009 23:23:11 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@...gle.com>,
	Holger Freyther <zecke@...fish.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug #14354] Bad corruption with 2.6.32-rc1 and upwards

On Tuesday 17 November 2009, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 11:37:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.31.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14354
> > Subject		: Bad corruption with 2.6.32-rc1 and upwards
> > Submitter	: Holger Freyther <zecke@...fish.org>
> > Date		: 2009-10-09 15:42 (39 days old)
> 
> Um, this was marked as resolved, until you reopened it and then reset
> the state to New.  Why did you do this?

I wasn't quite sure what the status was, because there was some activity in the
bug entry after it had been marked as resolved.

> It's fixed in mainline as of commit d4da6c9 when Linus reverted commit
> d0646f7.  Users could still see it if they mount a file system with -o
> journal_checksum, but (a) it's no longer the default, and (b)
> corruption if you use the non-default journal_checksum mount option is
> not a regression.
> 
> We have fixes to make journal_checksum safe queued for 2.6.33, but the
> revert fixes the regression problem.

OK, great, thanks for the confirmation.

I'll close it now.

Best,
Rafael
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ