From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Paris Subject: Re: [Bug #14474] restorecond going crazy on 2.6.31.4 - inotify regression? Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:32:01 -0400 Message-ID: <7e0fb38c0910270732p3a7098d3jc6334e417320295d@mail.gmail.com> References: <51f3faa70910261648h242a9a2dp42cdf554a9eb1342@mail.gmail.com> <200910270924.41037.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200910270924.41037.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Robert Hancock , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday 27 October 2009, Robert Hancock wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wro= te: >> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a repor= t >> > of regressions introduced between 2.6.30 and 2.6.31. >> > >> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regression= s >> > introduced between 2.6.30 and 2.6.31. =A0Please verify if it still= should >> > be listed and let me know (either way). >> > >> > >> > Bug-Entry =A0 =A0 =A0 : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id= =3D14474 >> > Subject =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : restorecond going crazy on 2.6.31.4 - in= otify regression? >> > Submitter =A0 =A0 =A0 : Robert Hancock >> > Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2009-10-16 0:03 (11 days old) >> > References =A0 =A0 =A0: http://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-kernel&m=3D125= 565159520489&w=3D4 >> >> This is definitely reproducible on 2.6.31.4 on CentOS 5.4, I'll like= ly >> try 2.6.31.5 shortly, but it doesn't seem like any of the 2.6.31.5 >> patches touch inotify.. It's a restorecond bug. restorecon acted as if watch descriptors could never be reused. They weren't on old kernels and it's possible they are reused now. Restorecon was fixed. http://marc.info/?l=3Dselinux&m=3D125380417916233&w=3D2 a change in the kernel caused a buggy userspace program to break. I know how to put the kernel back the way it was, but I don't know if we call this a regression, you guys tell me. -Eric