Bug#1050256: AppArmor breaks locking non-fs Unix sockets

[Salvatore Bonaccorso]

Hi Paul,

On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 10:21:02PM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 20:54:17 +0200 Paul Gevers <elbrus at debian.org> wrote:
> > On 09-09-2023 13:06, Paul Gevers wrote:
> > > All ci.d.n workers (except riscv64) now run the kernel from >
> > bookworm-backports. systemd passes it's autopkgtest again in unstable, >
> > testing and stable.
> > 
> > We're having issues [1] with the (backports and) unstable kernel on our
> > main amd64 host, so we reverted back to the stable kernel for amd64.
> > 
> > Paul
> > 
> > [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1052130
> 
> We're having issues [2] with the backports kernel on arm64 so our arm64,
> armhf and armel hosts are back to the previous backports (arm64) kernel.
> 
> I'm slightly wondering if the next point release (on Saturday) will bring us
> a fixed kernel for this issue? Given that this is the second time in 3
> months we experience an issue with backports kernels, I think we'll have to
> revert our hosts back to stable kernels for maintainability reasons.

TTBOMK, a backport of 1cf26c3d2c4c ("apparmor: fix apparmor mediating
locking non-fs unix sockets") for the 6.1.y stable series has not
landed yet so it's not included in the 6.1.64-1 update of the upcoming
point release next weekend.

John, as it was said you are working on having the fix backpored to
linux-6.1.y, is this still WIP?

Regards,
Salvatore