Re: [PATCH -next 1/2] mm/memfd: make F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal more robust
From: Stephen Rothwell <hidden>
Date: 2018-11-20 20:07:21
Also in:
linux-kselftest, linux-mm, lkml
Hi Joel, On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 10:39:26 -0800 Joel Fernandes [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 07:13:17AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:quoted
On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 9:21 PM Joel Fernandes (Google) [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
A better way to do F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal was discussed [1] last week where we don't need to modify core VFS structures to get the same behavior of the seal. This solves several side-effects pointed out by Andy [2]. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181111173650.GA256781@google.com/ (local) [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/69CE06CC-E47C-4992-848A-66EB23EE6C74@amacapital.net/ (local) Suggested-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> Fixes: 5e653c2923fd ("mm: Add an F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal to memfd")What tree is that commit in? Can we not just fold this in?It is in linux-next. Could we keep both commits so we have the history?
Well, its in Andrew's mmotm, so its up to him. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
Attachments
- (unnamed) [application/pgp-signature] 488 bytes