[PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Frederic Weisbecker]

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

The comment suggests that this usage is stale. There is no bkl in the
exec path so if there is a race lurking there, the bkl in ptrace is
not going to help in this regard.

Overview of the possibility of "accidental" races this bkl might
protect:

- ptrace_traceme() is protected against task removal and concurrent
read/write on current->ptrace as it locks write tasklist_lock.

- arch_ptrace_attach() is serialized by ptrace_traceme() against
concurrent PTRACE_TRACEME or PTRACE_ATTACH

- ptrace_attach() is protected the same way ptrace_traceme() and
in turn serializes arch_ptrace_attach()

- ptrace_check_attach() does its own well described serializing too.

There is no obvious race here.

Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
 kernel/ptrace.c |   10 ----------
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
index 42ad8ae..5357502 100644
--- a/kernel/ptrace.c
+++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
@@ -666,10 +666,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
 	struct task_struct *child;
 	long ret;
 
-	/*
-	 * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
-	 */
-	lock_kernel();
 	if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
 		ret = ptrace_traceme();
 		if (!ret)
@@ -703,7 +699,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
  out_put_task_struct:
 	put_task_struct(child);
  out:
-	unlock_kernel();
 	return ret;
 }
 
@@ -813,10 +808,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
 	struct task_struct *child;
 	long ret;
 
-	/*
-	 * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
-	 */
-	lock_kernel();
 	if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
 		ret = ptrace_traceme();
 		goto out;
@@ -846,7 +837,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
  out_put_task_struct:
 	put_task_struct(child);
  out:
-	unlock_kernel();
 	return ret;
 }
 #endif	/* CONFIG_COMPAT */
-- 
1.6.2.3

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:38:51PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> The comment suggests that this usage is stale. There is no bkl in the
> exec path so if there is a race lurking there, the bkl in ptrace is
> not going to help in this regard.
> 
> Overview of the possibility of "accidental" races this bkl might
> protect:
> 
> - ptrace_traceme() is protected against task removal and concurrent
> read/write on current->ptrace as it locks write tasklist_lock.
> 
> - arch_ptrace_attach() is serialized by ptrace_traceme() against
> concurrent PTRACE_TRACEME or PTRACE_ATTACH
> 
> - ptrace_attach() is protected the same way ptrace_traceme() and
> in turn serializes arch_ptrace_attach()
> 
> - ptrace_check_attach() does its own well described serializing too.
> 
> There is no obvious race here.


And the call to arch_ptrace() doesn't need any pushdown I think,
since this is serialized by nature as there is only one "ptracer"
for a task.



> 
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>  kernel/ptrace.c |   10 ----------
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
> index 42ad8ae..5357502 100644
> --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
> @@ -666,10 +666,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
>  	struct task_struct *child;
>  	long ret;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
> -	 */
> -	lock_kernel();
>  	if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
>  		ret = ptrace_traceme();
>  		if (!ret)
> @@ -703,7 +699,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
>   out_put_task_struct:
>  	put_task_struct(child);
>   out:
> -	unlock_kernel();
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> @@ -813,10 +808,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
>  	struct task_struct *child;
>  	long ret;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
> -	 */
> -	lock_kernel();
>  	if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
>  		ret = ptrace_traceme();
>  		goto out;
> @@ -846,7 +837,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
>   out_put_task_struct:
>  	put_task_struct(child);
>   out:
> -	unlock_kernel();
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  #endif	/* CONFIG_COMPAT */
> -- 
> 1.6.2.3
> 

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 03/28, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> The comment suggests that this usage is stale. There is no bkl in the
> exec path so if there is a race lurking there, the bkl in ptrace is
> not going to help in this regard.

I never understood this comment too, and I do not see any potentional
races bkl could prevent.

> Overview of the possibility of "accidental" races this bkl might
> protect:
>
> - ptrace_traceme() is protected against task removal and concurrent
> read/write on current->ptrace as it locks write tasklist_lock.
>
> - arch_ptrace_attach() is serialized by ptrace_traceme() against
> concurrent PTRACE_TRACEME or PTRACE_ATTACH
>
> - ptrace_attach() is protected the same way ptrace_traceme() and
> in turn serializes arch_ptrace_attach()
>
> - ptrace_check_attach() does its own well described serializing too.
>
> There is no obvious race here.

Yes, nothing inside sys_ptrace() pathes relies on bkl, and all recent
changes were done assuming that lock_kernel() doesn't exist.

I think the patch is correct.

Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>

> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>  kernel/ptrace.c |   10 ----------
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
> index 42ad8ae..5357502 100644
> --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
> +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
> @@ -666,10 +666,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
>  	struct task_struct *child;
>  	long ret;
>
> -	/*
> -	 * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
> -	 */
> -	lock_kernel();
>  	if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
>  		ret = ptrace_traceme();
>  		if (!ret)
> @@ -703,7 +699,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
>   out_put_task_struct:
>  	put_task_struct(child);
>   out:
> -	unlock_kernel();
>  	return ret;
>  }
>
> @@ -813,10 +808,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
>  	struct task_struct *child;
>  	long ret;
>
> -	/*
> -	 * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
> -	 */
> -	lock_kernel();
>  	if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
>  		ret = ptrace_traceme();
>  		goto out;
> @@ -846,7 +837,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
>   out_put_task_struct:
>  	put_task_struct(child);
>   out:
> -	unlock_kernel();
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  #endif	/* CONFIG_COMPAT */
> --
> 1.6.2.3
>

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[John Kacur]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/28, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>
>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>
>> The comment suggests that this usage is stale. There is no bkl in the
>> exec path so if there is a race lurking there, the bkl in ptrace is
>> not going to help in this regard.
>
> I never understood this comment too, and I do not see any potentional
> races bkl could prevent.
>
>> Overview of the possibility of "accidental" races this bkl might
>> protect:
>>
>> - ptrace_traceme() is protected against task removal and concurrent
>> read/write on current->ptrace as it locks write tasklist_lock.
>>
>> - arch_ptrace_attach() is serialized by ptrace_traceme() against
>> concurrent PTRACE_TRACEME or PTRACE_ATTACH
>>
>> - ptrace_attach() is protected the same way ptrace_traceme() and
>> in turn serializes arch_ptrace_attach()
>>
>> - ptrace_check_attach() does its own well described serializing too.
>>
>> There is no obvious race here.
>
> Yes, nothing inside sys_ptrace() pathes relies on bkl, and all recent
> changes were done assuming that lock_kernel() doesn't exist.
>
> I think the patch is correct.
>
> Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
>
>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>> ---
>>  kernel/ptrace.c |   10 ----------
>>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/ptrace.c b/kernel/ptrace.c
>> index 42ad8ae..5357502 100644
>> --- a/kernel/ptrace.c
>> +++ b/kernel/ptrace.c
>> @@ -666,10 +666,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
>>       struct task_struct *child;
>>       long ret;
>>
>> -     /*
>> -      * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
>> -      */
>> -     lock_kernel();
>>       if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
>>               ret = ptrace_traceme();
>>               if (!ret)
>> @@ -703,7 +699,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(ptrace, long, request, long, pid, long, addr, long, data)
>>   out_put_task_struct:
>>       put_task_struct(child);
>>   out:
>> -     unlock_kernel();
>>       return ret;
>>  }
>>
>> @@ -813,10 +808,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
>>       struct task_struct *child;
>>       long ret;
>>
>> -     /*
>> -      * This lock_kernel fixes a subtle race with suid exec
>> -      */
>> -     lock_kernel();
>>       if (request == PTRACE_TRACEME) {
>>               ret = ptrace_traceme();
>>               goto out;
>> @@ -846,7 +837,6 @@ asmlinkage long compat_sys_ptrace(compat_long_t request, compat_long_t pid,
>>   out_put_task_struct:
>>       put_task_struct(child);
>>   out:
>> -     unlock_kernel();
>>       return ret;
>>  }
>>  #endif       /* CONFIG_COMPAT */
>> --
>> 1.6.2.3
>>

So, just to be clear about this particular patch, who is queuing it up
to send to Linus? Would that be you Oleg, as a ptrace maintainer?

Thanks

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 03/29, John Kacur wrote:
>
> So, just to be clear about this particular patch, who is queuing it up
> to send to Linus? Would that be you Oleg, as a ptrace maintainer?

Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
is to send the patch to Andrew.

So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
forward it, but doesn't matter.

Oleg.

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[John Kacur]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/29, John Kacur wrote:
>>
>> So, just to be clear about this particular patch, who is queuing it up
>> to send to Linus? Would that be you Oleg, as a ptrace maintainer?
>
> Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> is to send the patch to Andrew.
>
> So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> forward it, but doesn't matter.
>
> Oleg.
>

I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
experimental,
so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
that have no
obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?

For fixes that have obvious maintainers though, I would just rather go through
the normal route.

John

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:26:26PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 03/29, John Kacur wrote:
> >>
> >> So, just to be clear about this particular patch, who is queuing it up
> >> to send to Linus? Would that be you Oleg, as a ptrace maintainer?
> >
> > Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> > is to send the patch to Andrew.
> >
> > So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> > forward it, but doesn't matter.
> >
> > Oleg.
> >
> 
> I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
> he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
> experimental,
> so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
> that have no
> obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?


I have cc'ed Andrew for this patch, partly for that purpose, so that he
can take it if he wants to.

But in the worst case these patches are never lost. We don't want to lose
them. For those that can't go in someone else .35 targeted tree for any reason,
I can queue them up in mine in a dedicated branch that I'll propose to Linus.


> 
> For fixes that have obvious maintainers though, I would just rather go through
> the normal route.


Exactly, as far as there is an active maintainer in the area concerned by a
random kill-bkl patch, I much prefer this patch goes to this maintainer.
It gives a much better passport for this patch, and it avoids possible
future conflicts in this area of code, less work for Stephen :)

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 03/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:26:26PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> > > is to send the patch to Andrew.
> > >
> > > So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> > > forward it, but doesn't matter.
> > >
> > I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
> > he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
> > experimental,
> > so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
> > that have no
> > obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?
>
>
> I have cc'ed Andrew for this patch, partly for that purpose, so that he
> can take it if he wants to.

Ah, good, I didn't notice.

If he doesn't pick this patch now, I'll forward it to him later again ;)

> But in the worst case these patches are never lost. We don't want to lose
> them. For those that can't go in someone else .35 targeted tree for any reason,
> I can queue them up in mine in a dedicated branch that I'll propose to Linus.

Frederic, whatever is more convenient to you.

Oleg.

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 08:35:02PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:26:26PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> > > > is to send the patch to Andrew.
> > > >
> > > > So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> > > > forward it, but doesn't matter.
> > > >
> > > I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
> > > he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
> > > experimental,
> > > so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
> > > that have no
> > > obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?
> >
> >
> > I have cc'ed Andrew for this patch, partly for that purpose, so that he
> > can take it if he wants to.
> 
> Ah, good, I didn't notice.
> 
> If he doesn't pick this patch now, I'll forward it to him later again ;)
> 
> > But in the worst case these patches are never lost. We don't want to lose
> > them. For those that can't go in someone else .35 targeted tree for any reason,
> > I can queue them up in mine in a dedicated branch that I'll propose to Linus.
> 
> Frederic, whatever is more convenient to you.


I just keep it somewhere and if it's not queued in one week or so, I'll put
it in my tree :-)

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 08:35:02PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:26:26PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> > > > is to send the patch to Andrew.
> > > >
> > > > So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> > > > forward it, but doesn't matter.
> > > >
> > > I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
> > > he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
> > > experimental,
> > > so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
> > > that have no
> > > obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?
> >
> >
> > I have cc'ed Andrew for this patch, partly for that purpose, so that he
> > can take it if he wants to.
> 
> Ah, good, I didn't notice.
> 
> If he doesn't pick this patch now, I'll forward it to him later again ;)
> 
> > But in the worst case these patches are never lost. We don't want to lose
> > them. For those that can't go in someone else .35 targeted tree for any reason,
> > I can queue them up in mine in a dedicated branch that I'll propose to Linus.
> 
> Frederic, whatever is more convenient to you.
> 
> Oleg.
> 


I have applied it to:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/random-tracing.git
	bkl/core

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:48:58 +0200
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 08:35:02PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 03/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:26:26PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> > > > > is to send the patch to Andrew.
> > > > >
> > > > > So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> > > > > forward it, but doesn't matter.
> > > > >
> > > > I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
> > > > he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
> > > > experimental,
> > > > so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
> > > > that have no
> > > > obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?
> > >
> > >
> > > I have cc'ed Andrew for this patch, partly for that purpose, so that he
> > > can take it if he wants to.
> > 
> > Ah, good, I didn't notice.
> > 
> > If he doesn't pick this patch now, I'll forward it to him later again ;)
> > 
> > > But in the worst case these patches are never lost. We don't want to lose
> > > them. For those that can't go in someone else .35 targeted tree for any reason,
> > > I can queue them up in mine in a dedicated branch that I'll propose to Linus.
> > 
> > Frederic, whatever is more convenient to you.
> > 
> > Oleg.
> > 
> 
> 
> I have applied it to:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/random-tracing.git
> 	bkl/core
> 

It hasn't turned up in linux-next yet?

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 01:29:10PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:48:58 +0200
> Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 08:35:02PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > On 03/29, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:26:26PM +0200, John Kacur wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:05 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cough. I must admit, apart from "urgent" bugfixes the only way I know
> > > > > > is to send the patch to Andrew.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So I'd suggest to send this patch to akpm. Of course, if you wish I can
> > > > > > forward it, but doesn't matter.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I know that in the past, Thomas was keeping a BKL tree in tip, but not sure if
> > > > > he is still doing so. It seems that Arnd's tree is at least partially
> > > > > experimental,
> > > > > so I wonder if we need to maintain another BKL tree somewhere of fixes
> > > > > that have no
> > > > > obvious maintainer, but are ready to send to Linus for inclusion?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I have cc'ed Andrew for this patch, partly for that purpose, so that he
> > > > can take it if he wants to.
> > > 
> > > Ah, good, I didn't notice.
> > > 
> > > If he doesn't pick this patch now, I'll forward it to him later again ;)
> > > 
> > > > But in the worst case these patches are never lost. We don't want to lose
> > > > them. For those that can't go in someone else .35 targeted tree for any reason,
> > > > I can queue them up in mine in a dedicated branch that I'll propose to Linus.
> > > 
> > > Frederic, whatever is more convenient to you.
> > > 
> > > Oleg.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have applied it to:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/random-tracing.git
> > 	bkl/core
> > 
> 
> It hasn't turned up in linux-next yet?


I've asked Stephen two days ago:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/4/10/42

I guess this is going to show up in -next soon.

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 528 bytes --]

Hi Andrew,

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:29:10 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:48:58 +0200 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > I have applied it to:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/frederic/random-tracing.git
> > 	bkl/core
> 
> It hasn't turned up in linux-next yet?

It will be there from today (assuming no problems).
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@canb.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] ptrace: kill BKL in ptrace syscall

[Roland McGrath]

Acked-by: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>


Thanks,
Roland