[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202405141251.8E9580E@keescook>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 12:52:13 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: jeffxu@...omium.org, jannh@...gle.com, sroettger@...gle.com,
willy@...radead.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, usama.anjum@...labora.com,
corbet@....net, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, surenb@...gle.com,
merimus@...gle.com, rdunlap@...radead.org, jeffxu@...gle.com,
jorgelo@...omium.org, groeck@...omium.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, pedro.falcato@...il.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, deraadt@...nbsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/5] Introduce mseal
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 10:46:46AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:35:19 +0000 jeffxu@...omium.org wrote:
>
> > This patchset proposes a new mseal() syscall for the Linux kernel.
>
> I have not moved this into mm-stable for a 6.10 merge. Mainly because
> of the total lack of Reviewed-by:s and Acked-by:s.
Oh, I thought I had already reviewed it. FWIW, please consider it:
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> The code appears to be stable enough for a merge.
Agreed.
> It's awkward that we're in conference this week, but I ask people to
> give consideration to the desirability of moving mseal() into mainline
> sometime over the next week, please.
Yes please. :)
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists