From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Casey Schaufler Subject: Re: [PATCH] selinux: add a skb_owned_by() hook Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 22:14:15 -0700 Message-ID: <5163A3A7.7060701@schaufler-ca.com> References: <6182509.cOVcY8B4g7@sifl> <1365479891.3887.99.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <5163992F.30406@schaufler-ca.com> <20130409.004144.1226810973846202358.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: eric.dumazet@gmail.com, pmoore@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, mvadkert@redhat.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, Casey Schaufler To: David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130409.004144.1226810973846202358.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-security-module-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 4/8/2013 9:41 PM, David Miller wrote: > It makes sure SYN/ACKs have a socket context attached to the > packet, which only LSMs actually need. > > You participated in the thread where this stuff was discussed and the > initial version of this patch was posted, so this patch, or any aspect > of it, should not be a mystery. I am flattered by your assumption that I can recall on a moment's notice every thread I've been involved in since 1978. A reference to that thread would be mighty helpful. The reality is that someone new to the thread is going to have a bunch of trouble figuring out what you're talking about. Every patch posting should have sufficient context that someone who did not happen to see the background threads will understand why it is being proposed. I believe you when you say that I participated in the discussion. I'll be dipped in caramel and rolled in nuts if I can find the threads. Help me out by providing enough context that I can find what I said, what you said, and if I still agree with myself.