From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D735829DF8 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 07:02:18 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7610AAC010 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 05:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id OHNFJpW3zbsOfhlv (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 05:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 05:02:13 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] xfs: fix tmpfile/selinux deadlock and initialize security/acl Message-ID: <20140430120213.GA19963@infradead.org> References: <1397071311-28371-1-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> <1397071311-28371-2-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1397071311-28371-2-git-send-email-bfoster@redhat.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Brian Foster Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Looks like I have lost the the argument on the ACLs. Do you want to resend a version of this rebased to the current tree, or should I do it? We probably should get this into 3.15 so that our tmpfile doesn't behave different from everyone else in the release where we introduce it. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs