[OpenAFS] Re: multiplt kernel call traces
Sat, 20 Mar 2010 13:37:59 -0700
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org=
rg] On Behalf Of Marc Dionne
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Andrew Deason <email@example.com> =
> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 09:16:48 -0500
> > Andrew Deason <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 07:08:48 -0700 (PDT)
> >> email@example.com wrote:
> >> > As a follow up to your response- will this problem "go away" for
> >> > kernel version 2.6.33? =A0If so, perhaps I can upgrade to that versi=
> >> >
> >> > As an alternative- can I fix this by downgrading the kernel to some
> >> > lesser version (say 2.6.30)?
> >> "The IMA problem" effectively exists in 2.6.30-2.6.32.
> > ...however, Simon tells me that the fedora 2.6.30 packages may not have
> > enabled IMA, so he's probably right that 2.6.30 would be fine.
> Yeah, pretty sure there was no Fedora 2.6.30 kernel with IMA enabled,
> that came with 2.6.31.
> The problem with the IMA fix as it was done in 2.6.33 is that it makes
> substantial changes to how/where the IMA accounting is done - probably
> not something you'd want as-is for 2.6.32-stable.
> What I hope is that Fedora 12 will get an update to 2.6.33 in the not
> too distant future. If we take 2.6.32 as an example, it was added to
> F12 roughly a month after its release, and 2.6.33 was released on Feb.
> 24. I don't know what the plan is, and looking in Koji I haven't seen
> any 2.6.33 builds targeted for F12 yet.
2.6.33 may have some badness ahead too. Somewhere in
the release cycle the INIT_WORK definition changed to
call the (new) __init_work function, which is GPL only.
This breaks the released OpenAFS kernel modules.
btw, as I recall, the 2.6.33 fc13 builds will otherwise
work OK on fc12 (if you also upgrade the linux-firmware rpm).