Re: [REVIEW][PATCH v2] mm: Add a user_ns owner to mm_struct and fix ptrace permission checks

[ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org (Eric W. Biederman)]

Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> writes:

> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 12:39:18AM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 10:54:34AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > I can't imagine either of these changes making a practical difference
>> > to anyone but I am calling them out in case someone can.
>> > 
>> >  include/linux/mm_types.h |  1 +
>> >  kernel/fork.c            |  9 ++++++---
>> >  kernel/ptrace.c          | 26 +++++++++++---------------
>> >  mm/init-mm.c             |  2 ++
>> >  4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>> 
>> Thanks a huge, Eric! And really sorry for delay in response,
>> I managed to miss this quite important mail for me in mail
>> storm. Gonna test it and will write you the results. Overall looks
>> great, but better be sure and run the tests.
>> 
>> Reviewed-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov-GEFAQzZX7r8dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
>
> Eric, on which kernel the patch is on top of?
> It doesn't apply on linux-next for some reason.
>
>  | Date:   Thu Oct 27 14:21:59 2016 +1100
>  | 
>  |     Add linux-next specific files for 20161027
>  |     
>  |     Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>
>
> I applied it on Linus' master and tests passed fine
> (but they were passing fine even without the patch,
>  only linux-next failed).

Odd.  I don't think I have taken the old version out of
linux-next yet.   So you can probably revert the old version out of
linux-next and apply this one.  All of my development at this point is
against v4.9-rc1.

I suspect you will find my last version on top of against v4.9-rc1 will
pass.  Since my tree is only one deep and I don't think anyone except
linux-next is based on it, I plan to drop and readd this patch.
Especially since it is candidate for backporting.

Eric