On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 12:55 -0500, Paul Moore wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Richard Haines > <richard_c_hai...@btinternet.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 16:13 -0500, Paul Moore wrote: > > > A quick note to let you know that I've just rebased the > > > selinux/next > > > branch to v4.16-rc1. Over the next day or two I'm going to be > > > working > > > through the backlog of kernel patches, most notably the SCTP > > > work. > > > > > > > I've just rebuilt the SCTP patch set on Fedora using: > > > > kernel-4.16.0-0.rc1.git0.1.fc28.src.rpm > > > > I found there were a number of changes required to get the SCTP > > specific patches (2/4 and 3/4) to build as there have been many > > updates > > since kernel 4.14. > > > > The 4-16 kernel build passes my SCTP SELinux Testsuite although I > > also > > added the "netlabel: If PF_INET6, check sk_buff ip header version" > > [1] > > patch as well. > > > > It's probably best I post these patches so the SCTP team can > > finally ok > > them (or not). > > If you don't mind doing the rebase that would be helpful. We'll have > to wait and see what the changes look like, but I don't expect there > to be a problem with the SCTP folks, Marcelo has been very helpful > thus far. > > As far as the NetLabel patch is concerned, yes, go ahead and include > that in the patchset.
I did not include the "netlabel: If PF_INET6, check sk_buff ip header version" [1] in the final V6 patches as it was the only one that did not require a rebase, therefore [1] can still go standalone in kernel 4.16 > > Thanks! > > > [1] https://marc.info/?l=selinux&m=151061619115945&w=2 > > >
