[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240514104646.e6af4292f19b834777ec1e32@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 10:46:46 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: jeffxu@...omium.org
Cc: keescook@...omium.org, jannh@...gle.com, sroettger@...gle.com,
willy@...radead.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, usama.anjum@...labora.com, corbet@....net,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, surenb@...gle.com, merimus@...gle.com,
rdunlap@...radead.org, jeffxu@...gle.com, jorgelo@...omium.org,
groeck@...omium.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
pedro.falcato@...il.com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, deraadt@...nbsd.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/5] Introduce mseal
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:35:19 +0000 jeffxu@...omium.org wrote:
> This patchset proposes a new mseal() syscall for the Linux kernel.
I have not moved this into mm-stable for a 6.10 merge. Mainly because
of the total lack of Reviewed-by:s and Acked-by:s.
The code appears to be stable enough for a merge.
It's awkward that we're in conference this week, but I ask people to
give consideration to the desirability of moving mseal() into mainline
sometime over the next week, please.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists