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

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 24 Feb 2014 16:55:36 +0000 (UTC)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Thomas
> > Gleixner" <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Rusty Russell" <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David Howells" <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>,
> > "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, February 24, 2014 10:54:54 AM
> > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
> > 
> [...]
> 
> (keeping discussion for later, as I'm busy at a client site)
>  
> > For now, I'm going to push this in, and also mark it for stable.
> 
> Which patch or patches do you plan to pull, and which is marked for stable ?

The one that I replied to. I can't pull the module patch unless I get
an ack from Rusty.

> 
> This thread is a RFC PATCH. I posted a separate more complete patch in
> a separate thread marked [PATCH].

Yeah, I'll post it out soon enough.

-- 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/