From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm-aS9lmoZGLiVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: What's the status of 87b47932 patch - mnt: Implicitly add MNT_NODEV on remount as we do on mount Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 17:04:03 -0600 Message-ID: <87k32dlicc.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> References: <20141127101105.GA30605@linux-rxt1.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141127101105.GA30605-empE8CJ7fzk2xCFIczX1Fw@public.gmane.org> (joeyli's message of "Thu, 27 Nov 2014 18:11:05 +0800") List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: containers-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: joeyli Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Richard Weinberger , Linux Containers , Andy Lutomirski , Jim Fehlig , Cedric Bosdonnat List-Id: containers.vger.kernel.org joeyli writes: > Hi Eric, > > Sorry for bother you. I saw your patch: > mnt: Implicitly add MNT_NODEV on remount as we do on mount > > Already commited in linux-next: > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/fs/namespace.c?id=87b47932f40a11280584bce260cbdb3b5f9e8b7d > > But, I didn't see this patch show in v3.18-rc kernel in Linus's git tree. > What's the status of 87b47932 patch? Does there have regression cases it > could not be merged to v3.18 kernel? The patch actually breaks remounting filesystems that did not have MNT_NODEV set when theny were mounted. The primary issue is that the bug hit at a very inopportune time in my life (just before kernel summit) after which I had a vacation planned and after that I had some serious job hunting and moving to do. Now I am busily trying to catch up on my queue and these long delayed bug fixes are the next issue. If folks can review/test the current version of the patch (to follow in a moment) I would appreciate it. Based on previous testing unless I have a typo what I expect to see is: lxc - b0rked. The old versions of lxc must be broken to fix the security issue. libvirt-lxc - fixed. Andy's thing - fixed. Any comments on the next user namespace breaking security fix that is being finalized would also be appreciated. Eric