Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:33:31 -0700 (PDT) | From | James Morris <> | Subject | Re: [2.6.20.17 review 00/58] 2.6.20.17 -stable review |
| |
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> On 22/08/07, James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > > > > Oops, never mind - tail still follows secmark, so that shouldn't matter. > > > So I'm not sure why we are getting a bad value for secmark here - should > > > be initialized to zero and never modified unless there is an iptables > > > secmark rule. > > > > Michal, do you see this in current git? > > No, I do not see this problem in 2.6.23. I had similar problem last > month, but it is fixed now. > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/7/12/362
The previous problem is theoretically unrelated. It arose via a separate mechanism which can't be used at the same as the one you're seeing now in the logs.
So this either looks like a problem which has gone unnoticed and was inadvertently fixed at some point, or is unique to the 2.6.20 stable series.
- James -- James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |