From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-it1-f198.google.com (mail-it1-f198.google.com [209.85.166.198])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 398F86B21D5
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 15:33:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-it1-f198.google.com with SMTP id d1-v6so4137178itj.8
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:33:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65])
        by mx.google.com with SMTPS id l22-v6sor858535iok.112.2018.11.20.12.33.20
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (Google Transport Security);
        Tue, 20 Nov 2018 12:33:20 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 1/2] mm/memfd: make F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal more robust
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
In-Reply-To: <20181121070658.011d576d@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 13:33:18 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <469B80CB-D982-4802-A81D-95AC493D7E87@amacapital.net>
References: <20181120052137.74317-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> <CALCETrXgBENat=5=7EuU-ttQ-YSXT+ifjLGc=hpJ=unRgSsndw@mail.gmail.com> <20181120183926.GA124387@google.com> <20181121070658.011d576d@canb.auug.org.au>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
List-ID: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@oracle.com>, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>


> On Nov 20, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote=
:
>=20
> Hi Joel,
>=20
>> On Tue, 20 Nov 2018 10:39:26 -0800 Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org=
> wrote:
>>=20
>>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 07:13:17AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 9:21 PM Joel Fernandes (Google)
>>> <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote: =20
>>>>=20
>>>> A better way to do F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal was discussed [1] last week=

>>>> where we don't need to modify core VFS structures to get the same
>>>> behavior of the seal. This solves several side-effects pointed out by
>>>> Andy [2].
>>>>=20
>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181111173650.GA256781@google.com/
>>>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/69CE06CC-E47C-4992-848A-66EB23EE6C74@a=
macapital.net/
>>>>=20
>>>> Suggested-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
>>>> Fixes: 5e653c2923fd ("mm: Add an F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE seal to memfd") =20=

>>>=20
>>> What tree is that commit in?  Can we not just fold this in? =20
>>=20
>> It is in linux-next. Could we keep both commits so we have the history?
>=20
> Well, its in Andrew's mmotm, so its up to him.
>=20
>=20

Unless mmotm is more magical than I think, the commit hash in your fixed tag=
 is already nonsense. mmotm gets rebased all the time, and is only barely a g=
it tree.=