Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 17:58:18 +0000 (UTC)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> > The one that I replied to. I can't pull the module patch unless I get
> > an ack from Rusty.
> 
> Do you mean the internal API semantic change you propose for tracepoints ?
> If yes, then how do you consider this a fix worthy of being backported to
> stable ?
> 

Actually, for now, I'm going to just add a nasty warning when a module
fails to load the tracepoints. At least that should notify people that
what went wrong.

-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/