Re: [PATCH] docs: landlock: clarify TTY signal scoping

["Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 10:52:55AM -0400, Christopher Lusk wrote:
> Hello Günther,
> 
> Thank you for the careful review.
> 
> The phrase "or otherwise driving a terminal" was LLM over-generalization,
> not a separate mechanism.  I checked the paths I had in mind against the
> source, and none justifies that broader wording.  I am dropping it.

Thanks for double checking the wording, sounds good.

        
> You are also right about the verbosity.  The generated text expanded a
> two-line distinction into 15 lines and obscured the main point.  I will use
> your suggested sentence and remove the signal enumeration.  I do not have a
> stable kernel documentation URL for that list, so I will not add a citation.
> 
> v2 will contain your sentence and a short LANDLOCK_SCOPE_SIGNAL remark in
> landlock.h, matched to the recent MAKE_REG whiteout remark.  I will post it
> as a new top-level patch with a Link back to this discussion.
> 
> I will keep the positive selftest you suggested as a separate follow-up so
> the documentation clarification can be reviewed independently.

Sounds good as well.

—Günther