[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110815005815.GX5782@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2011 02:58:15 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>,
Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC] x86: restrict pid namespaces to 32 or 64 bit syscalls
> Perhaps :) I wish it had landed after 9 revisions and at least two
> variant patches. Despite that, I think it's great to pull in
> additional requirements, like COMPAT locking, to make sure that the
> solution is really a good one. It may also be that my entire original
> approach was wrong and should be revisited too. Everyone's comments
> here and the proposed patch itself certainly have me thinking.
I didn't see anything wrong with it. Also the first try doesn't
need to be perfect anyways, it can be always changed later.
How about you just repost it?
-Andi
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.
