[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <31674.1334874414@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 23:26:54 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
David Smith <dsmith@...hat.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] cred: change keyctl_session_to_parent() to use task_work_add()
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 04/19, David Howells wrote:
> >
> > Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I am not going to argue, but honestly I don't think it is a good
> > > idea to mix the functional changes in keyctl.c and the simple
> > > (but obviously untested) cleanups.
> >
> > I meant add the cleanup as patch 4. That way they are still separate. I'll
> > let you change the name of the function to make it easier;-)
>
> OK.
>
> I'd like to avoid the unnecessary resends, lets discuss this before
> I send the patch(es).
>
> At least I'd like to split this into 2 patches:
>
> 4/3: only removes the dead code from arch/*
>
> 5/3: updates copy_creds/exit_creds and kills
> ->replacement_session_keyring, plus renames
> key_change_ back to key_replace_
>
> Do you agree?
Well, don't bother renaming the function back, but apart from that, okay.
David
--
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