From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758043AbZEKLfy (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2009 07:35:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755624AbZEKLfo (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2009 07:35:44 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:54785 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755989AbZEKLfn (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 May 2009 07:35:43 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 13:33:56 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Roland McGrath Cc: Oleg Nesterov , David Howells , jmorris@namei.org, chrisw@sous-sol.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, eparis@redhat.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] CRED: Rename cred_exec_mutex to reflect that it's a guard against ptrace Message-ID: <20090511113356.GB4748@elte.hu> References: <20090508125522.8488.13637.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20090509185906.GB10396@redhat.com> <20090510232938.A62E1FC35D@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090510232938.A62E1FC35D@magilla.sf.frob.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Roland McGrath wrote: > > Hmm. Ingo's "rename ptrace_may_access => ptrace_access_check" conflicts > > with my patch too. > > Andrew seemed to want a different name choice too, so that will have to be > resolved before we worry about patch conflicts. > > > Andrew, Roland, I guess I should re-send > > > > ptrace-ptrace_attach-check-pf_kthread-exit_state-instead-of-mm.patch > > ptrace-cleanup-check-set-of-pt_ptraced-during-attach.patch > > ptrace-do-not-use-task_lock-for-attach.patch > > > > patches? > > I guess so too. Your series of changes is more substantial and > potentially controversial or problematic than the various > renamings, so I think it makes sense to settle and merge the > renamings first. yeah, cleanups first is generally the better strategy. Not only does it make reverts easier, it also makes it easier to review (and potentially fix) later patches. Ingo