search for: reappli

I did a mistake (shame on me). While migrating accounts on a new server, I didn't pay attention to a detail: sieve_max_actions, that I set to a low value for my testings, but then forgot to raise before the migration. As a result, several redirect-only accounts have now their inbox filled with messages that should have been redirected to "real people", then discarded. Would there

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 05:39:11PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Greetings, > > Running a kernel with ATOMIC_SLEEP enabled in one of my VMs, I met the > splat below. I tracked it back to 4.14-stable, and bisected it there. Why does your virtual machine use a drm driver? Ah, it's a driver for virtual gpu, nice. And if you revert that patch, does everything work again? > #

On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 05:39:11PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Greetings, > > Running a kernel with ATOMIC_SLEEP enabled in one of my VMs, I met the > splat below. I tracked it back to 4.14-stable, and bisected it there. Why does your virtual machine use a drm driver? Ah, it's a driver for virtual gpu, nice. And if you revert that patch, does everything work again? > #

On Sun, 2018-06-17 at 11:36 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > And if you revert that patch, does everything work again? Yes. -Mike

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2018-06-17 at 11:36 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > > And if you revert that patch, does everything work again? > > Yes. Great, Dave, care to revert this in 4.18 so I can queue up that revert in older kernels as well? thanks, greg k-h

On 17 June 2018 at 21:02, Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> On Sun, 2018-06-17 at 11:36 +0200, Greg KH wrote: >> > >> > And if you revert that patch, does everything work again? >> >> Yes. > > Great, Dave, care to revert this in 4.18 so I can queue up that revert

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 12:38:06PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2018-06-17 at 11:36 +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > > > And if you revert that patch, does everything work again? > > Yes. Great, Dave, care to revert this in 4.18 so I can queue up that revert in older kernels as well? thanks, greg k-h

Yes. I'm seeing this as well and it predates Kostya's change. Shows up as memory corruption or double free on Linux. On Nov 14, 2013 10:46 PM, "Alexey Samsonov" <samsonov at google.com> wrote: > FYI I've seen what looked like a memory corruption in (private) Clang > bootstrap process long before Kostya's changes were submitted. I hope I'll > have the

No, not that I am aware of. On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:15 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >> The bit code file produced by the stage 1 compiler for one of the files in the clang driver is corrupt and causes the linker for stage 2 to crash. > > Is AddressSanitizer involved in

I was able to successfully build with r194701, so I have reapplied that along with the compiler-rt changes. Somehow we need to get to the bottom of the problem. If you can reproduce it, please help!! On Nov 14, 2013, at 11:01 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> wrote: > Yes. I'm seeing this as well and it predates Kostya's change. S...

I don’t know yet, but I will let you know as soon as I can. On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >> No, not that I am aware of. > > So, if my commits did indeed trigger the failures it could be > something like binary size change that caused

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > No, not that I am aware of. So, if my commits did indeed trigger the failures it could be something like binary size change that caused different code alignment or some such and which triggered a latent memory bug somewhere else. It's already late evening for you now. Will you have a chance to reapply

...raffic. If I restart the hosts firewall 'service iptables restart', all the guest-specific rules get blown away. Is there a way to reapply all the guest firewall rules, without restarting each individual guest? It looks like if I edit a nwfilter with `virsh nwfilter-edit` it goes and reapplies the rules to all the guests, so this functionality seems to be present already.

I’m waiting to see if this fixes the buildbots. Unfortunately, because they were failing all day, there are a bunch of other regressions that have come up, and I’m still working through them. It takes quite a while to run a bootstrapped LTO clang build, so it will take a while longer. I don’t have any other useful information at this point, and I share your puzzlement about how your changes

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Kostya, > > Thanks for the heads-up on this. I haven’t had a chance to look into the > details yet, but it looks like these patches may be breaking our > bootstrapped LTO build. Our buildbots have been failing all day, and we’re > still trying to figure out the problem. I’m going to

Ok. I'm configuring my iptables scripts so that specific iptables rules for virtual network interfaces used for tinc go on tinc-up-fw and tinc-down-fw custom scripts. When I reload iptables rules manually to apply changes iptables scripts flush all chains and reapply rules and now also search in /etc/tinc/<netname>/ directories if the related virtual network interface is up and running

The bit code file produced by the stage 1 compiler for one of the files in the clang driver is corrupt and causes the linker for stage 2 to crash. On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:13 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > What are the symptoms? > > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >> I’m waiting to see if this fixes the

FYI I've seen what looked like a memory corruption in (private) Clang bootstrap process long before Kostya's changes were submitted. I hope I'll have the chance to investigate it soon. On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > I don’t know yet, but I will let you know as soon as I can. > > On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:18 PM, Kostya

Also, when are you planing to "reapply the changes or help debug"? On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: >> Hi Kostya, >> >> Thanks for the heads-up on this. I haven’t had a chance to look into the >> details yet, but it looks

Your reasoning sounds correct to me. Let's revert for now? I don't think there is an easy fix, we'll have to do a global "must be executed" analysis to reapply the patch soundly. And that's difficult since any external functional call can call "exit(0)". -- Sanjoy On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 6:19 AM Tim Northover <t.p.northover at gmail.com> wrote: >