linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix return code and improve feature check for synthetic uevents

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, 6 Dec 2018 09:40:38 +0100
From:   Peter Rajnoha <prajnoha@...hat.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     rafael@...nel.org, jeyu@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        msekleta@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix return code and improve feature check for
 synthetic uevents

Dňa 5. 12. 2018 o 17:30 Greg KH napísal(a):
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 12:27:43PM +0100, Peter Rajnoha wrote:
>> Two small patches to aid handling of synthetic uevents back in userspace:
>>
>>   - Return error code back to userspace on /sys/.../uevent file write
>>     failure so userspace knows and it can act accordingly.
>>
>>   - Add new 'kernel/uevent_features' sysfs file to make it possible for
>>     userspace to check that the extended synthetic uevent arguments are
>>     supported without relying on kernel version check only.
>>
>> Peter Rajnoha (2):
>>   kobject: return error code if writing /sys/.../uevent fails
>>   kobject: add kernel/uevent_features sysfs file
> 
> Did you send this series twice?  Which one should I pay attention to?
> 
> confused,
> 
> greg k-h
> 

They're same, I just sent it again because I forgot to add the LKML list
with the first one. So please take the latter one with that list on CC.
Sorry for the confusion.

-- 
Peter