[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E1E46CA.9030007@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:30:50 +0900
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: jmorris@...ei.org
CC: torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, neilb@...e.de, solar@...nwall.com,
segoon@...nwall.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...e.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, davem@...emloft.net,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, jslaby@...e.cz,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
eparis@...hat.com, sds@...ho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH] move RLIMIT_NPROC check from set_user() to do_execve_common()
(2011/07/14 9:11), James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>> It sounds like people are effectively Ack'ing the patch, but with this
>> kind of patch I don't want to add the "implicit Ack" that I often do
>> for regular stuff.
>>
>> So could people who think that the patch is ok in its current form
>> just send me their acked-by or reviewed-by? I haven't heard any actual
>> objection to it, and I think it's valid for the current -rc.
>>
>> Alternatively, feel free to send a comment like "I think it's the
>> right thing, but maybe it should wait for the next merge window"..
>
> Count me in the latter.
>
> It does look ok to me, but I'd be happier if it had more testing first (in
> -mm perhaps). I think some security folk may be on summer vacation, too.
I don't think I am best person to take ack. but I also don't want to hesitate
to help Solar's good improvemnt.
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
And I'll second James. next mere window is probably safer.
Thanks.
--
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