| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1106301128590.13496@tundra.namei.org> Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:30:42 +1000 (EST) From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> To: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org> cc: Chris Evans <scarybeasts@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, djm@...drot.org, segoon@...nwall.com, kees.cook@...onical.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, rostedt@...dmis.org, fweisbec@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 05/13] seccomp_filter: Document what seccomp_filter is and how it works. On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Will Drewry wrote: > Since it seems that there'll be consumers (openssh, vsftpd, kvm/qemu, > chromium, chromium os) and feedback quieted down, what are the next > steps to get this to a pull/no-pull decision points (or at least some > Ack's or Nack's)? I know this patch series crosses a number of > maintainers, and I never know exactly what's next when the feedback > slows down. Are there any outstanding objections to this approach? How do the tracing folk feel about it? -- James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org> -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists