[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whB0A_WsBpr3MFujWKi7WW9XLxUpq=z_uYTv+J7uE0wRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 08:37:28 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michael Kerrisk-manpages <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>,
Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] signal: use fdget() since we don't allow O_PATH
On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:19 AM Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io> wrote:
>
> It's just semantically correct to use fdget()
> and return an error right from there instead of taking a reference and
> returning an error later.
I've applied this one directly, because it ends up affecting the
existing code, and I'd rather just have the initial release of
pidfd_send_signal() right.
The other patches I consider to be "future release" material.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists