[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080904152248.50773a6d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 15:22:48 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Cc: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
yhlu.kernel@...il.com, ink@...assic.park.msu.ru,
jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, dwmw2@...radead.org, sam@...nborg.org,
johnstul@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for September 3
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:03:41 -0700
ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
>
> > On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:31:01 -0700
> > ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> >
> >> >> are you sure it's a plain tree of mine, without any of the patches
> >> >> floating around between Eric/Al?
> >> >
> >> > yup, it's yesterday's mainline.
> >>
> >> Does the problem happen if you disable selinux?
> >>
> >> This feels like a case of selinux being over zealous.
> >
> > yeah, adding `selinux=0' to the boot command line fixes it.
>
> The proc generic directory back structure is the same. As requested by
> the selinux folks. So I don't expect there is much more we can do on
> the /proc side.
>
> When we get the interaction bug between the VFS and /proc/net fixed I wonder
> if there will be some more selinux fall out. Something to think about.
fyi, that machine is x86_32-on-FC5. My x86_64-on-FC6 test box is
also running selinux and has the same bug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists