| apw | omicrom (N,BFTL), hmmm that says you can't load them in old kernels, and can in new, is that right ? | 07:11 |
|---|---|---|
| === infinity_ is now known as infinity | ||
| SrinivasGowda | Hi guys just wanted to report a change that needs to be made on this document | 08:16 |
| SrinivasGowda | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/PowerManagement/ThermalIssues | 08:16 |
| SrinivasGowda | The last section near the footer with "sudo restart thermald" | 08:16 |
| SrinivasGowda | needs to be changed to "sudo service thermald restart" | 08:17 |
| === ikonia_ is now known as ikonia | ||
| apw | SrinivasGowda (N,BFTL), thanks | 08:52 |
| apw | SrinivasGowda (N,BFTL), and fixed | 09:28 |
| soren | apw: "(N,BFTL)"? | 09:37 |
| smb | soren, Not(there), But For The Log. I wondered the same. :) | 09:41 |
| apw | soren, yeah that | 09:44 |
| onicrom | apw: sorry i cannot load the nvidia kernel modules in any kernel newer than 3.13.0-30 | 10:06 |
| apw | onicrom, i think we are already aware of that, i think tseliot was on the case there | 10:08 |
| apw | soren, and i think that shows that is worth it :) | 10:08 |
| tseliot | onicrom: weren't you using drivers from a ppa? | 10:08 |
| onicrom | tseliot: i was then i switched back | 10:15 |
| onicrom | same problem | 10:15 |
| tseliot | onicrom: what driver are you using? | 10:16 |
| onicrom | nvidia-331-updates 331.38-0ubuntu7.1 | 10:16 |
| tseliot | onicrom: are you running Precise or Trusty? | 10:17 |
| onicrom | trusty | 10:17 |
| tseliot | onicrom: ok. Is there a bug report about it? | 10:19 |
| onicrom | i had only been searching google for something and couldnt find, if there is a more appropriate place to search for a bug i can do there | 10:20 |
| soren | apw: :) | 10:20 |
| soren | smb: Thanks :) | 10:20 |
| tseliot | onicrom: please type "ubuntu-bug nvidia-331-updates" and file a bug report from there | 10:20 |
| soren | Google gave some interesting suggestions, though, but I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to look them up. :) | 10:20 |
| onicrom | thanks tseliot | 10:29 |
| === FJKong is now known as FJKong_CW | ||
| === _ruben_ is now known as _ruben | ||
| === lamont` is now known as lamont | ||
| rtg | dannf, your patch 'Allow for package revisions condusive for branching' does not correctly extract the ABI number when the version is of the form 3.16.0-8.13~14.10 (as it is for the LTS kernel). | 16:07 |
| dannf | rtg: ah, wasn't familiar with that string - i'll fix. if you need to revert in the meantime, no hard feelings :) | 16:07 |
| dannf | rtg: are there any other version forms you need to deal with? | 16:09 |
| rtg | dannf, that is the only other version form I use. I've reverted your patch only in the LTS branch so far. | 16:09 |
| dannf | ack | 16:10 |
| === FreezingAlt is now known as FreezingCold | ||
| === Mikee_C is now known as Mikee_C_afk | ||
| hallyn | apw: stgraber: hi, in a current ubuntu-cloud utopic vm (3.16.0-5-generic) unprivileged overlayfs appears broken | 17:27 |
| hallyn | lxc-clone -s -o u1 -n u2 fails | 17:27 |
| bjf | hallyn, do you know if there are any tests for that in lxc-tests? we run those tests and nothing is failing. | 17:35 |
| bjf | stgraber, ^ | 17:36 |
| stgraber | I don't believe lxc-test-unpriv currently tries that, though we probably should | 17:36 |
| bjf | thanks | 17:36 |
| bjf | would also give apw handy tests to run | 17:36 |
| apw | sounds good | 17:41 |
| hallyn | Yeha, it'd be a good thing to test, just not sure how to finagle that for upstream tests | 17:43 |
| hallyn | I.e. most kernels don't yet expect that to be allowed, so how do we sanely say "in this system, fail if the overlayfs mount fails" | 17:43 |
| apw | hallyn, i'll have a look at the unpriv issue in the am i guess, i am fading fast, is there a bug filed | 17:59 |
| hallyn | apw: not yet. in a bit i'll file a bug with hopefully a testcase | 18:00 |
| hallyn | apw: thanks - ttyl | 18:00 |
| apw | hallyn, sweet, we may have lost a fix rolling forward, has happened before | 18:01 |
| hallyn | yeah usually it tends to be apparmor :) | 18:01 |
| apw | hallyn, or that :) | 18:05 |
| stgraber | hallyn: IIRC lxc-test-userns is already an Ubuntu-only test (as in, configure will only include it on Ubuntu systems) | 18:08 |
| apw | /proc/version_signature is pretty much ubuntu specific | 18:09 |
| hallyn | stgraber: yeah, Makefile.am does it. | 18:09 |
| hallyn | so the test can go there | 18:10 |
| hallyn | meanwhile i need to set up a trusty vm so i can actually test overlay clones real quick :) | 18:10 |
| hallyn | apw: opened bug 1357025 | 18:39 |
| ubot5 | bug 1357025 in linux (Ubuntu) "unprivileged overlayfs mounts no longer work in utopic" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1357025 | 18:39 |
| kees | did you guys typo this: | 21:44 |
| kees | * auditsc: audit_krule mask accesses need bounds checking | 21:44 |
| kees | - LP: #1347088 | 21:44 |
| ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1347088 in linux (Ubuntu) "Trusty update to 3.13.11.5 stable release" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1347088 | 21:44 |
| kees | 3.13.11.5 is not in trusty's kernel. | 21:44 |
| bjf | kees, i'll check but i think that's going into what we are currently working on ... will come out in 2 weeks | 21:46 |
| rtg | kees, its in Ubuntu-3.13.0-33.58 | 21:47 |
| rtg | according to the git log | 21:47 |
| bjf | kees, rtg is right that came out on monday | 21:48 |
| kees | rtg: but why does the Makefile show 3.13.11.4 then? | 21:48 |
| bjf | kees, because we pulled it from the upstream stable set and put it into a special kernel | 21:48 |
| kees | $ git log | grep -m1 "Linux 3.13.11.4" | 21:49 |
| kees | Linux 3.13.11.4 | 21:49 |
| kees | but this returns nothing: | 21:49 |
| kees | $ git log | grep -m1 "Linux 3.13.11.5" | 21:49 |
| rtg | d428381b112e220dbba0b6d8197b51db60318432 in master-next | 21:49 |
| kees | so it's certainly not in 33.58 | 21:49 |
| bjf | kees, are you looking at master or master-next ? | 21:50 |
| kees | I'm looking at master, but specifically I was looking at 33.58 which claimed to have that bug (3.13.11.5) fixed. | 21:51 |
| kees | so it looks like a typo in the changelog, and that 3.13.11.5 is on it's way. | 21:51 |
| bjf | kees, one sec. | 21:52 |
| bjf | 6ff733c0b2cac445b2535a9adc83c76a315052be auditsc: audit_krule mask accesses need bounds checking | 21:53 |
| bjf | $ git tag --contains 6ff733c0b2cac445b2535a9adc83c76a315052be | 21:53 |
| bjf | Ubuntu-3.13.0-33.58 | 21:53 |
| bjf | Ubuntu-3.13.0-34.59 | 21:53 |
| bjf | Ubuntu-3.13.0-34.60 | 21:53 |
| bjf | kees, ^ | 21:55 |
| kees | bjf: 6ff733c0b2cac445b2535a9adc83c76a315052be is not "all of 3.13.11.5" which is what bug #1347088 claims to be | 21:56 |
| ubot5 | bug 1347088 in linux (Ubuntu Trusty) "Trusty update to 3.13.11.5 stable release" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1347088 | 21:56 |
| bjf | kees, yes and as i said above we pulled that one commit from the .5 stable release just specially for "someone" who was whining at us about it | 21:57 |
| kees | sure, but it seems like that bug shouldn't be closed, since all the other fixes (e.g. "ptrace: fix fork event messages across pid namespaces") haven't been imported yet. | 21:58 |
| bjf | kees, ok, but that's kind of a minor nit | 21:58 |
| bjf | kees, i can fix that | 21:59 |
| kees | I just found it confusing since "Trusty update to 3.13.11.5 stable release" hasn't happened, but the bug got closed. :) | 21:59 |
| bjf | kees, yes, that was confusing | 22:00 |
| kees | but it sounds like it's on it's way still, which is totally fine. I just had people asking me why their ptrace stuff was still breaking even though they were running with the kernel version that closed that bug. :) | 22:01 |
| kees | all is clear now! thanks :) | 22:01 |
| bjf | kees, .5 is almost in the oven | 22:02 |
| kees | \o/ | 22:02 |
| rtg | kees, we often cherry-pick patches in advance of stable releases | 22:03 |
| bjf | rtg, the issue here is/was that it has a buglink for a general upstream stable release | 22:03 |
| bjf | rtg, and then we pulled it earlier so when 33.58 went out the .5 tracking bug got marked fix-released | 22:04 |
| rtg | bjf, oh, I see how that could happen. | 22:04 |
| bjf | rtg, i saw that it was going to happen and ment to go back and fix the bug but forgot | 22:05 |
| hallyn | jjohansen: hi, bug 1357103 is a squirrely one andreas just ran into | 22:15 |
| ubot5 | bug 1357103 in lxc (Ubuntu) "apparmor denied a golang build inside a container" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1357103 | 22:15 |
| hallyn | apparmor is denying file_mmap to a file which presumably is cloned from another btrfs subvolume | 22:16 |
| jjohansen | hallyn: interesting | 22:41 |
| hallyn | jjohansen: heh, any ideas on the cause though? | 22:42 |
| jjohansen | hallyn: maybe the name is disconnected | 22:43 |
| jjohansen | hallyn: I think that will be due to an issue with bind mounts that I hit | 22:43 |
| jjohansen | hallyn: I have a patch that for that, that we can try and see if it resolves it | 22:44 |
| hallyn | jjohansen: cool! better than i'd hoped | 22:44 |
| jjohansen | hallyn: which kernel would you like me to build to test? trusty, utopic? | 22:45 |
| jjohansen | the bug is trusty, so I am assuming that, but ... | 22:45 |
| hallyn | jjohansen: yeah, i haven't reproduced myself, so what andreas has | 22:46 |
| jjohansen | okay, I added a note to the bug, and I will get the test kernel attached tonight | 22:47 |
| hallyn | thanks! | 22:48 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!