Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 01 Feb 2007 11:38:18 +0500 | From | "Alexander E. Patrakov" <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.6.20-rc7 |
| |
H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> It would be interesting to know what the inode numbers are in the >>> image; also, >>> what is the exact behaviour -- do you end up with a missing link, or >>> do both >>> entries end up getting hard-linked to an empty file? >> >> Judging by the >> >> request_module: runaway loop modprobe binfmt-0000 >> >> one or more of the hardlinked binaries (modprobe being one, but not >> necessarily the one that initially triggers hits) will read all zeroes- >> >> Or at least bytes at offsets 2 and 3 will read as zero, causing it to >> not be recognized as a proper binary, causing that "binfmt-0000" thing. >> > > Or perhaps not read at all, which would explain the problem. > > cpio represents a hard link as who headers with the same type and the > same file (inode) number and a link count that is > 1. Only the first > one contains data; the subsequent ones have length 0. It's fairly easy > for a bug in the decoder to truncate the file upon encountering the > second header, since this is somewhat of a special case (it would have > been better if the cpio format distinguished "hard link" explicitly, as > tar does.) > > I will look into this as soon as I can, but as I'm currently in the > middle of job hunting it might take until the weekend.
What's the proper way to make sure that the fix, when it appears, ends up in my inbox?
-- Alexander E. Patrakov - 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/
| |