Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 20:39:40 -0600 From: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, rdunlap@...otime.net, mcgrathr@...omium.org, tglx@...utronix.de, luto@....edu, eparis@...hat.com, serge.hallyn@...onical.com, djm@...drot.org, scarybeasts@...il.com, indan@....nu, pmoore@...hat.com, corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com, markus@...omium.org, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 01/13] sk_run_filter: add support for custom load_pointer On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 16:57:49 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote: >> > Hi Kees, >> > >> > On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 15:37:12 -0800 Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Is it time to pull this into -next so more people can feel it? I brought >> >> Andy Lutomirski's patches forward (needed to bump the prctl values), and >> >> updated my git tree. If we're ready, here it is in all its request-pull >> >> format glory: >> >> >> >> The following changes since commit 2422c8368337196594265d52cad7316c9404bfcf: >> >> __ Stephen Rothwell (1): >> >> __ __ __ __ Add linux-next specific files for 20120301 >> > >> > OK, not commenting on anything else, but I cannot merge that into >> > linux-next because it is based on yesterday's linux-next release and >> > linux-next (effectively) rebases every day ... >> > >> > Does this work depend on anything in linux-next? __Or could it be just >> > based off Linus' tree. __If it depends on other tree(s) merged into >> > linux-next, then you should base your tree on those tree(s) as long as >> > they never get rebased ... >> >> Unfortunately, yes, it does -- there were both ptrace changes and prctl changes. >> >> And at least the ptrace changes are, IIRC, in -mm, which has no tree. >> :P Given that, what's the best thing for me to do for this to be easy >> for you to pull? > > Base the tree on mainline and wreck the -mm patches I guess. I'm good > at unwrecking patches. > > That assumes that we're going to merge this stuff into 3.4 - if we > don't, unwrecker gets rewrecked and grumpy. > > I don't know if we're going to merge it into 3.4? I haven't been > paying a lot of attention and haven't looked at the patches in a while. > I'll roll a v13 which is just a rebase back onto mainline and see if I can just stage it in kees's tree. Thanks! will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.