[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F6F73B9.2000207@zytor.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 12:36:25 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>
CC: 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, 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, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
corbet@....net, eric.dumazet@...il.com, markus@...omium.org,
coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, keescook@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/13] seccomp_filter: syscall filtering using BPF
On 03/14/2012 08:11 PM, Will Drewry wrote:
> Please see prior revisions of this patch series for a high
> level blurb.
>
> This revision makes a number of refinements and tweaks. The biggest
> change is a slight renumbering of the return codes which will break
> existing code using this patch series.
>
> I believe this patch is in good shape, and I don't see the need for
> any more API changes at this point. I plan to start using this revision
> more extensively, and I'd certainly appreciate any testing.
>
> Thanks!
> will
>
x86 portions:
Reviewed-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
What is the preferred way to push this upstream? (Presumably for 3.5 at
this point, but we should get it into -next as soon as possible after
the merge window.)
-hpa
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.
