Re: [PATCH v9 05/13] seccomp_filter: Document what seccomp_filter isand how it works.

[Ingo Molnar]

* Will Drewry <wad@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > * James Morris <jmorris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Will Drewry wrote:
> >>
> >> > Since it seems that there'll be consumers (openssh, vsftpd,
> >> > kvm/qemu, chromium, chromium os) and feedback quieted down, what
> >> > are the next steps to get this to a pull/no-pull decision points
> >> > (or at least some Ack's or Nack's)?  I know this patch series
> >> > crosses a number of maintainers, and I never know exactly what's
> >> > next when the feedback slows down.
> >>
> >> Are there any outstanding objections to this approach?  How do the
> >> tracing folk feel about it?
> >
> > I think i outlined my objections a couple of times and haven't seen
> > them addressed.
> 
> After our last discussion, I suggested changes which I then undertook
> and reposted.  Those changes have been posted for over two weeks.

Have you addressed my basic objection of why we should go for a more 
complex and less capable variant over a shared yet more capable 
facility:

  http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20110526091518.GE26775@xxxxxxx

?

You are pushing the 'filter engine' approach currently, not the 
(much) more unified 'event filters' approach.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/