[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2017-07-04 Thread Dimitrenko
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed => Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1644302 Title: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce) To

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-29 Thread Launchpad Bug Tracker
This bug was fixed in the package linux - 3.13.0-103.150 --- linux (3.13.0-103.150) trusty; urgency=low [ Luis Henriques ] * Release Tracking Bug - LP: #1644489 * Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce) (LP: #1644302) - SAUCE: apparmor: delete

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-24 Thread Luis Henriques
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu Trusty) Status: New => Fix Committed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1644302 Title: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce) To

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-23 Thread Seth Arnold
Steve, this patch looks good to me. Thanks -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1644302 Title: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce) To manage notifications about

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-23 Thread Steve Beattie
Okay, I can confirm that Luis' patch fixes the oops and test failures that I am seeing. Also, the mount.sh test in the apparmor userspace package is a bit broken, even when things are working correctly, it aborts early (but does an exit 0, so it doesn't get noticed), skipping 3 of the tests.

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-23 Thread Luis Henriques
** Also affects: linux (Ubuntu Trusty) Importance: Undecided Status: New -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1644302 Title: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-23 Thread Steve Beattie
One difference between the userspaces in precise and trusty is that the trusty version supports mount rules. Also, Luis noticed that in aa_new_mount(), "struct path dev_path" is redefined, and thus shadowed. He's doing a test kernel with the following patch applied: diff --git

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-23 Thread Steve Beattie
I'm able to reproduce this on an amd64 guest with the lts-backport- trusty kernel installed, though I get a different signal: ubuntu@sec-precise-amd64:~/tmp/apparmor-2.7.102/tests/regression/apparmor$ sudo sh -c 'VERBOSE=1 bash mount.sh' ok: MOUNT (unconfined) ok: UMOUNT (unconfined)

[Bug 1644302] Re: Possible regression on 3.13.0-102.149~precise1 x86_64 (gce)

2016-11-23 Thread Tyler Hicks
Considering that https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu- kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux/+git/trusty/commit/?h=master- next=74a2b3a087989058f29a195c706e2740fbfed258 between Ubuntu-3.13.0-101.148 and Ubuntu-3.13.0-102.149, I think this is a potentially serious regression. That patch was to fix a bug (bug