From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com ([58.251.152.64]:57051 "EHLO szxga01-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750868AbbD3Eng (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:43:36 -0400 Message-ID: <5541B217.5080705@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 12:39:51 +0800 From: Wang Kai MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Zefan Li CC: , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] get rid of s_files and files_lock References: <1430305255-55947-1-git-send-email-morgan.wang@huawei.com> <1430305255-55947-2-git-send-email-morgan.wang@huawei.com> <5541A076.2000101@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <5541A076.2000101@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2015/4/30 11:24, Zefan Li wrote: > On 2015/4/29 19:00, Wang Kai wrote: >> From: Al Viro >> >> commit eee5cc2702929fd41cce28058dc6d6717f723f87 upstream. >> >> The only thing we need it for is alt-sysrq-r (emergency remount r/o) >> and these days we can do just as well without going through the >> list of files. >> >> Signed-off-by: Al Viro >> [wangkai: backport to 3.10 >> - address CVE-2014-8172 >> - adjust context >> - leave fu.fu_list as still used in 3.10] > > This doesn't sound right to me. We're removing operations on fu_list like > init/add/del, so how can it still be used? Thanks for review, Zefan. The fix commit eee5cc2702 comes after 4f5e65a1cc90, which replace fu_list with fu_llist for avoiding lock. So, if we don't backport 4f5e65a1cc90, we should leave fu_list there. Or, should we backport 4f5e65a1cc90 too? IMO, as it's NOT bugfix, and just backport this one will NOT make work easier(cherry-picked), so looks unnecessary. Another question, this bugfix will change kernel's header files(API), how LTS handle with this, OK with that? > > > . >