linux-kernel - Re: UBIFS errors since Linux 5.15

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: <84354d51-bfa2-4d6b-895f-f9cf610d4bb6@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 17:49:33 -0600
From: Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
Cc: linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        chengzhihao1 <chengzhihao1@...wei.com>,
        OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sethjenkins@...gle.com,
        adobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: UBIFS errors since Linux 5.15


On 11/7/25 2:03 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Eddie,
>
> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>> Von: "Eddie James" <eajames@...ux.ibm.com>
>> An: "linux-mtd" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, "richard" <richard@....at>, "chengzhihao1" <chengzhihao1@...wei.com>,
>> "OpenBMC Maillist" <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>, "linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sethjenkins@...gle.com,
>> "adobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>
>> Gesendet: Freitag, 7. November 2025 18:38:54
>> Betreff: UBIFS errors since Linux 5.15
>> Hello,
>>
>> We are updating some BMC (Aspeed AST2600, ARM32) systems that were on
>> Linux 5.4 but observe consistent UBIFS errors with Linux 5.15 and later.
>> The errors seem to vary; there is a sampling below.
>>
>>
>> We performed a git bisect and came up with the following commit, which
>> of course is completely unrelated to UBIFS. Reverting it does prevent
>> the issue... Does anyone have any suggestions?
>>
>> commit 33fc9e26b7cb39f0d4219c875a2451802249c225
>> Author: Seth Jenkins <sethjenkins@...gle.com>
>> Date:   Thu Oct 27 11:36:52 2022 -0400
> That's indeed strange.
> Are you absolutely sure that this commit triggers the issue?
> E.g. if you revert it on top of 5.15 the issue vanishes and when you
> re-apply it, the issue is back?


Thanks for your quick reply. Yes, that is the case; it's not very 
logical. We are currently running more extended tests with 5.15 with 
33fc9e26b reverted. I assume the potential for corruption is there 
without this commit too, but somehow it doesn't happen.


Eddie


>
> Thanks,
> //richard
>