Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1156252
| From | "Al Ma" <alma0@ro.ru> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.bugs.dist, linux.debian.kernel |
| Subject | Bug#1003965: Processed: upgrading linux-image-6.1.0-10-amd64 leads to “BPF: Invalid name” |
| Date | 2023-07-27 19:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <GWd7X-3bM8-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <GVT9J-2YQ2-213@gated-at.bofh.it> <GVT9t-2YQ2-109@gated-at.bofh.it> <GVT9t-2YQ2-109@gated-at.bofh.it> <DH0sW-1w9-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <GVT9J-2YQ2-213@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
Ben, I wonder why you merged #1042237 and #1003965. The BPF messages coincide in the almost empty lines “[…] BPF:” and coincide up to spacing in “[…] BPF: Invalid name”. The coincidences seem to end here. Some of the remaining “[…] BPF: …” lines are similar but, strictly speaking, different. Moreover, in #1042237 these mesages have been read from the console, whereas in #1003965, they have been taken from the kernel log. Further, in #1042237 no information about any modules is printed, whereas in #1003965, a bunch of modules seems to get not validated and not being able to load. Finally, #1042237 occured during kernel upgrade only once (and has NOT re-occurred so far AFAIK during boot), which might indicate a problem at kernel upgrades, whereas #1003965 occured during boot. Gratefully, AlMa
Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Bug#1042237: upgrading linux-image-6.1.0-10-amd64 leads to “BPF: Invalid name” AlMa <AlMa0@ro.ru> - 2023-07-26 22:20 +0200 Bug#1003965: Processed: upgrading linux-image-6.1.0-10-amd64 leads to “BPF: Invalid name” "Al Ma" <alma0@ro.ru> - 2023-07-27 19:40 +0200
csiph-web