From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: RHEL 6.5 shared library upgrade safety Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 13:57:16 +0200 Message-ID: <53F1EA1C.1020108@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6U7NTVgOcJ02rGVOQo9g5k5mJ46nlxQE7" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:33167 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751120AbaHRL50 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Aug 2014 07:57:26 -0400 Received: from [10.9.0.6] (unknown [10.0.2.28]) by smtp.dmail.dachary.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9BE4209E for ; Mon, 18 Aug 2014 13:57:16 +0200 (CEST) Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --6U7NTVgOcJ02rGVOQo9g5k5mJ46nlxQE7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Ceph, In RHEL 6.5, is the following scenario possible :=20 a) an OSD dlopen a shared library for erasure-code,=20 b) the shared library file is replaced while the OSD is running,=20 c) the OSD starts using the new file instead of the old one.=20 It seems unlikely but it would explain a weird stack trace at http://trac= ker.ceph.com/issues/9153#note-5 so I'm double checking ;-) Cheers --=20 Lo=EFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --6U7NTVgOcJ02rGVOQo9g5k5mJ46nlxQE7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlPx6hwACgkQ8dLMyEl6F20HGwCZAU3Rh9MCC/vso4zQBMNBgGlF 4owAn1BpYdvEi5a9nRr9WC0gLyj1OlT+ =lo5h -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6U7NTVgOcJ02rGVOQo9g5k5mJ46nlxQE7--