From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id q28NrUN6104116 for ; Thu, 8 Mar 2012 17:53:30 -0600 Received: from ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail06.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.129]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id cqKTUObzLlLn3Z9g for ; Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:53:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:53:26 +1100 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: Safe to use XFS in production in Linux 3.2.9? Message-ID: <20120308235326.GQ5091@dastard> References: <20120308140600.77406b8zzy2zggkc@web.mail.umich.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120308140600.77406b8zzy2zggkc@web.mail.umich.edu> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Sean Thomas Caron Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 02:06:00PM -0500, Sean Thomas Caron wrote: > Hi all, > > We're currently using Linux 3.0.12 with Cristoph's > xfs-bulletproof-sync patch and it seems to be working very well for > us. Unfortunately this kernel is vulnerable to the recent > CVE-2012-0056 no permission checking on writes to /proc/(pid)/mem > local root exploit, so we've got to leave it behind. Hasn't it been fixed in 3.0.23? root exploits are the sort of thing that are supposed to be fixed in long term stable kernels.... > I see that the newest recommended stable kernel on kernel.org is > 3.2.9. Have there been any major changes to XFS between 3.0.12 and > 3.2.9 that would be considered "risky" in a production environment? The 3.2.x kernels really haven't been run in production environments for that long for us to be able to tell if there are problems or not. > I assume the xfs-bulletproof-sync patch has already been committed > to the code base in 3.2-train, so we shouldn't have to worry about > that any longer? Should have been, but I'm not exactly sure what is in that patch Christoph gave you, so you'll have to verify that yourself. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs