linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/24] vfs: fixes and cleanups + add helpers to check r/o bind mounts

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E1JtKTz-0001BC-BO@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Tue, 06 May 2008 12:33:15 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	hch@...radead.org
CC:	miklos@...redi.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hch@...radead.org,
	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/24] vfs: fixes and cleanups + add helpers to check
	r/o bind mounts

> > Here it is again as a single series (without the ecryptfs one already
> > merged).
> > 
> > I've addressed Christoph's comments.
> 
> And totally ignored Al's while merging the second rejected series into
> the first one.

Al doesn't like it but everybody else does.  His excuses are very
hollow and hypocritical, just take this for example: "Except that it
fixes nothing in nfsd, as we'd already figured out".  That's after
discussing extensively how racy the current nfsd code is.  And even
then the only acknowledgement I get is that the code has always been
racy.  You bet it has been bloody racy, that's what the r-o-bind
patches are supposed to fix.

All through that tread, I got a barrage of nasties thrown at me, and
every time it turned out that I was right.  And then just that issue
disappears from the next reply.  No "sorry about that, you were
right".  Yes, I'm getting tired from Al's attitude towards this thing,
and as long as no better patches from him or anybody else are
forthcoming, or comments actually addressing the _patches_ themselves,
instead of some hypothetical users of these interfaces, I'm just going
to ignore Al's rejections outright.

Now I have much respect for work he has and is doing on the kernel,
make no mistake.  But that doesn't make him somebody who can reject
patches on a whim.

> I also still want to go over the various setattr-related changes,
> pleawse give me some time for those.

Sure, and thanks for looking at the patches.

Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/