[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120106111606.GA11892@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 12:16:06 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Federica Teodori <federica.teodori@...glemail.com>,
Lucian Adrian Grijincu <lucian.grijincu@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2012.1] fs: symlink restrictions on sticky directories
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 11:05:20 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
> > * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe true for a general purpose computer, but someone who
> > > is making a single-purpose device such as a digital TV or
> > > a wifi router won't want it.
> >
> > That's the case for 99% of the features and semantics we
> > have: by definition a single-purpose device uses only a
> > small sub-set of an infinite purpose OS, right?
> >
> > Still we only modularize semantics out if they easily fit
> > into some existing plug-in/module concept, if the feature is
> > arguably oddball that a sizable portion of people want to
> > disable, or if it makes notable sense for size reasons. To
> > me it looked distinctly silly to complicate things for such
> > a small piece of code.
>
> We're talking tens or hundreds of millions of machines for
> which the patch is a straightforward speed and space
> regression. Fixing this needs just a little Kconfig twiddling
> and a #else clause. We may as well do it.
No strong objections from me.
> > I doubt Kees would mind modularizing it, but it would be nice to
> > get VFS maintainer feedback in the:
> >
> > { 'you are crazy, over my dead body' ... 'cool, merge it' }
> >
> > continuous spectrum of possible answers.
>
> Well yes. We'll get there.
>
> Alas, I've become rather slack in my maintainer patchbombing
> in the past year or two. It's just boring and depressing to
> spray patches at maintainers and have 90% or more of them
> simply ignored. [...]
How about just sending it to Linus after the first ignored patch
[perhaps marked in a special way, to make Linus aware of the
out-of-band nature of the patches], instead of buffering them
indefinitely and increasing your overhead all around?
We'll no doubt regret some of those patches going upstream, but
that's OK i think, this is an exception mechanism.
> [...] I'm sitting on 45 such patches at present so I suppose I
> should get off my tail and do a respray.
(If I missed any then let me know.)
Thanks,
Ingo
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.
