[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200409134236.mksvudaucp3jawf6@comp-core-i7-2640m-0182e6>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2020 15:42:36 +0200
From: Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Security Module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Daniel Micay <danielmicay@...il.com>,
Djalal Harouni <tixxdz@...il.com>,
"Dmitry V . Levin" <ldv@...linux.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v11 0/8] proc: modernize proc to support multiple
private instances
On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 07:59:47AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com> writes:
>
> > Preface:
> > --------
> > This is patchset v11 to modernize procfs and make it able to support multiple
> > private instances per the same pid namespace.
> >
> > This patchset can be applied on top of:
> >
> > git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ebiederm/user-namespace.git
> > 4b871ce26ab2
>
>
>
> Why the resend?
>
> Nothing happens until the merge window closes with the release of -rc1
> (almost certainly on this coming Sunday). I goofed and did not act on
> this faster, and so it is my fault this did not make it into linux-next
> before the merge window. But I am not going to rush this forward.
>
>
>
> You also ignored my review and have not even descibed why it is safe
> to change the type of a filesystem parameter.
>
> - fsparam_u32("hidepid", Opt_hidepid),
> + fsparam_string("hidepid", Opt_hidepid),
>
>
> Especially in light of people using fsconfig(fd, FSCONFIG_SET_...);
>
> All I need is someone to point out that fsparam_u32 does not use
> FSCONFIG_SET_BINARY, but FSCONFIG_SET_STRING.
I decided to resend again because I was not sure that the previous
patchset was not lost. I also wanted to ask David to review and explain
about the new API. I in any case did not ignore your question about
changing the type of the parameter.
I guess I was wrong when I sent the whole patchset again. Sorry.
> My apologies for being grumpy but this feels like you are asking me to
> go faster when it is totally inappropriate to do so, while busily
> ignoring my feedback.
>
> I think this should happen. But I can't do anything until after -rc1.
I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean to rush you.
--
Rgrds, legion
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.
