Re: Module stacking next steps

From: Casey Schaufler
Date: Thu Apr 30 2015 - 10:49:05 EST

On 4/30/2015 4:20 AM, James Morris wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, John Johansen wrote:
>> On 04/29/2015 06:55 PM, James Morris wrote:
>>> On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>>>> James, do you want to take the module stacking changes in through
>>>> the security tree? Are there remaining objections or concerns? What
>>>> procedure would you like to follow?
>>> What's the overall consensus on this -- do people generally see it as
>>> useful and necessary, and is it ready to go in?
>>> Any objections or concerns?
>> No objections, and I know there are several people interested in seeing
>> this land.
>> I am happy with the code, and my only concerns lie with things that this
>> explicitly doesn't support yet (ie. larger lsm stacking, secids, ...)
> Ok, Casey, please send an updated final version for everyone to check.

Are you planning to update security-next soon? I think that it will
be easier for everyone if I base it on the 4.1-rc than the 4.0-rc.
Alternatively, I could base it on 4.0. I can do any of 'em, but I'd
hate to have to do it more often than I have to.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at