From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ml-raid@syscall.eu Subject: Re: Possible bug Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:39:20 +0100 Message-ID: <4B1F7048.7080101@syscall.eu> References: <4B1E5220.8030500@syscall.eu> <20091209125724.2652d413@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20091209125724.2652d413@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neil Brown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Neil Brown wrote: > This is not a RAID problem - it was a problem with the grsec patches. > They assume that any atomic variable is used as a counter and should = not > overflow. That is not the case with bd_disk->sync_io. It is expecte= d to > overflow. So the "PAX: ..." report is a false positive. >=20 Thank you, i've reported the bug to the grsec guys. Regards, Rapha=EBl -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html