linux-kernel - Re: [159/244] ipc/mqueue.c: fix mq

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]

Date:	Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:53:19 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm00@...il.com>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, stable-review@...nel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [159/244] ipc/mqueue.c: fix mq_open() return value

----- Original Message -----
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 19:31:41 -0400 (EDT)
> 
> (Please hit <enter> occasionally?)

It's this frikkin' Zimbra mail client.  Something about it using
text/flowed or something like that.  Anyway, I'll manually line
wrap.

> This is all waaaaay too confusing.  For starters, please never say
> "the
> patch" or "it" or "new patch".  Patches have names - let's use them,
> and greatly reduce the amount of head-spinning.  (And I mean "names",
> not git hashes, which can be different in different trees).
> 
> There are no patches againt ipc/mqueue.c pending in any tree I can
> see
> apart from the 4+fix from yourself, which are in -mm and will be in
> linux-next next time I send an update to Stephen:
> 
> ipc-mqueue-cleanup-definition-names-and-locations.patch
> ipc-mqueue-switch-back-to-using-non-max-values-on-create.patch
> ipc-mqueue-enforce-hard-limits.patch
> ipc-mqueue-update-maximums-for-the-mqueue-subsystem.patch
> ipc-mqueue-update-maximums-for-the-mqueue-subsystem-checkpatch-fixes.patch
> 
> Everything else is already in Linus's tree.
> 
> I don't have a clue what's going on here.  Let's start again.

Your right.  The patch I was referring to was the patch I NAKed,
which is this patch:
d40dcdb ipc/mqueue.c: fix mq_open() return value

I didn't think it was in Linus' tree because of faulty memory.  I
remembered seeing ENOMEM as the return and not EMFILE when I wrote
my patches.  But, that makes sense given that I was originally staring
at our internal 2.6.18 kernel tree as I wrote the code, and only
later did I port it to Linus' tree.  I spent a lot more time looking
at our internal tree where the above patch doesn't exist.

So, as I said, Greg I withdraw my NAK and we'll just fix it up in
your stable tree after my patches have been reviewed/accepted in
some version of Linus' tree.

-- 
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
              GPG KeyID: CFBFF194
	      http://people.redhat.com/dledford

--
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/