[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87r1wwvja4.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 09:13:55 -0500
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.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
Alexey Gladkov <gladkov.alexey@...il.com> writes:
> 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.
It looks like. My apologies for the misunderstanding then.
Eric
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.
