On 03/08, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 9 Mar 2012 08:46:11 +1100 > Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Greg, > > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 10:36:15 -0800 Greg KH <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 09:21:18PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > > > A patchset from Oleg Nesterov which is in linux-next.git > > > > > > > > kmod: make __request_module() killable > > > > kmod: introduce call_modprobe() helper > > > > usermodehelper: ____call_usermodehelper() doesn't need do_exit() > > > > usermodehelper: implement UMH_KILLABLE > > > > usermodehelper: introduce umh_complete(sub_info) > > > > > > > > contains killable request_module() code. > > > > These patches do not have "Cc: <[email protected]> [2.6.11+]" > > > > line, but > > > > distributors might want them because this patchset is needed for > > > > preventing > > > > local memory allocation DoS attacks. > > > > > > Thanks for letting me know, I'll watch out for when they hit Linus's > > > tree in the 3.4-rc1 merge window. > > > > > > You wouldn't happen to know the git commit ids for these patches, do > > > you? That would help me me tracking them. > > > > Unfortunately, these patches are in Andrew's tree and so their commit > > id's change every day (as his tree is rebased on the rest of linux-next > > each day). > > > > Andrew, should they be marked with Cc: stable? > > I'd decided "no", because nobody has hit the bug in the real world and > the patches are fairly extensive. > > Test cases to demonstrate the problem were developed, but they > involved driving the MM system into oom-killing, and if you have > hostile unprivileged users who can do that to your machine, you already > have problems.
I agree, I don't think this is -stable material. Oleg. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
