From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wright Subject: Re: [PATCH] scm: fold __scm_send() into scm_send() Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 15:43:38 -0800 Message-ID: <20060320234338.GW15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> References: <200603201244.58507.netdev@axxeo.de> <20060320201802.GS15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> <20060320213636.GT15997@sorel.sous-sol.org> <20060320.152838.68858441.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: chrisw@sous-sol.org, cxzhang@watson.ibm.com, netdev@axxeo.de, ioe-lkml@rameria.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060320.152838.68858441.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org * David S. Miller (davem@davemloft.net) wrote: > From: Chris Wright > Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 13:36:36 -0800 > > > The point of Catherine's original patch was to make sure there's always > > a security identifier associated with AF_UNIX messages. So receiver > > can always check it (same as having credentials even w/out sender > > control message passing them). Now we will have garbage for sid. > > I'm seriously considering backing out Catherine's AF_UNIX patch from > the net-2.6.17 tree before submitting it to Linus later today so that > none of this crap goes in right now. > > It appears that this needs a lot more sorting out, so for now that's > probably the right thing to do. I won't object. I checked your tree, it looks OK to me. The actual broken patch appears in -mm, and the security_sid_to_context snafu is primarily cosmetic at this point (the exports, etc fixed the real compilation issues AFAICT). But, again, if you want to drop that's fine w/ me. I'm sure Catherine can cleanup and resend as needed. thanks, -chris