From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] RFC: changed error code when binding unix socket twice
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 16:56:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181107155644.GA29531@dell5510> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1q32spcF445Zhw-KMXG2VwFZuMw5C1sYFk3qLXz3HB5w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi
> I forgot that 4.1 has ended a while ago. Greg also sometimes still takes patches
> for 3.18, so that might be a candidate aside from 3.18
Gregkh, David, does it make sense to you to merge commit 0fb44559ffd6 ("af_unix:
move unix_mknod() out of bindlock") to 3.18? If yes, please do so.
> > I guess we need to adjust LTP test to accept either return code as EOL longterm
> > branches probably will not take this patch.
> I'd argue that if we decide that EADDRINUSE is the intended return value,
> it would be appropriate for LTP to warn about kernels that never got the
> backport.
> The alternative would be to not backport the patch further, and then change LTP
> to no longer warn. Note that the bug that got fixed by the 0fb44559ffd6 patch
> is probably more important than the return code, so I would say
> we want the patch backported to anything that people still run anyway,
> especially if they are running LTP to make sure it works correctly.
> Arnd
Kind regards,
Petr
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: gregkh <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: mkubecek@suse.cz, Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ltp@lists.linux.it, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>,
junchi.chen@intel.com, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: RFC: changed error code when binding unix socket twice
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 16:56:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181107155644.GA29531@dell5510> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a1q32spcF445Zhw-KMXG2VwFZuMw5C1sYFk3qLXz3HB5w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi
> I forgot that 4.1 has ended a while ago. Greg also sometimes still takes patches
> for 3.18, so that might be a candidate aside from 3.18
Gregkh, David, does it make sense to you to merge commit 0fb44559ffd6 ("af_unix:
move unix_mknod() out of bindlock") to 3.18? If yes, please do so.
> > I guess we need to adjust LTP test to accept either return code as EOL longterm
> > branches probably will not take this patch.
> I'd argue that if we decide that EADDRINUSE is the intended return value,
> it would be appropriate for LTP to warn about kernels that never got the
> backport.
> The alternative would be to not backport the patch further, and then change LTP
> to no longer warn. Note that the bug that got fixed by the 0fb44559ffd6 patch
> is probably more important than the return code, so I would say
> we want the patch backported to anything that people still run anyway,
> especially if they are running LTP to make sure it works correctly.
> Arnd
Kind regards,
Petr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-07 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-30 7:34 RFC: changed error code when binding unix socket twice Michal Kubecek
2018-08-31 11:14 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2018-08-31 11:14 ` Petr Vorel
2018-10-29 13:03 ` [LTP] " Arnd Bergmann
2018-10-29 13:03 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-10-29 16:33 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2018-10-29 16:33 ` Petr Vorel
2018-10-29 20:48 ` [LTP] " Arnd Bergmann
2018-10-29 20:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2018-11-07 15:56 ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2018-11-07 15:56 ` Petr Vorel
2018-11-29 12:36 ` [LTP] " gregkh
2018-11-29 12:36 ` gregkh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20181107155644.GA29531@dell5510 \
--to=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.