Sorry, forgot to reply to list as well, resending for completeness.
On Mon, Mar 28, 2016 at 08:19:12AM -0400, Phil Turmel wrote:
> On 03/28/2016 06:31 AM, Étienne Buira wrote:
../..
> > After printking the values for rdev->new_data_offset and
> > rdev->data_offset in the
> > if (rdev->new_data_offset != rdev->data_offset) { ...
> > block of super_1_sync, i found that new_data_offset (252928 in my case)
> > where smaller than data_offset (258048), thus, the substraction to
> > compute sb->new_data_offset yielded an insanely high value.
>
> Modern mdadm and kernels avoid the use of backup files by adjusting the
> data offset. The lowered offset you see is normal.
>
> I suspect the grsecurity kernels haven't kept up with this. If you can
> reproduce a problem with a vanilla kernel, please report back here.
> Otherwise you'll have to report to your kernel provider.
>
> Phil
Hi,
Thank you for the answer.
I tried to reproduce the case with vanilla 4.4.6, but couldn't enter the
above said 'if', so i'm giving up on this topic.
However, i'm still surprised that sb->new_offset gets assigned a
'negative' (well, high, because it is computed unsigned) value.
Regards.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
