On Wed, 24 May 2023 11:47:50 +0100 Luca Boccassi wrote: > > I will send SO_PEERPIDFD as an independent patch too, because it > > doesn't require this change with CONFIG_UNIX > > and we can avoid waiting until CONFIG_UNIX change will be merged. > > I've a feeling that the discussion around making CONFIG_UNIX to be a > > boolean won't be easy and fast ;-) > > Thank you, that sounds great to me, I can start using SO_PEERPIDFD > independently of SCM_PIDFD, there's no hard dependency between the > two. How about you put the UNIX -> bool patch at the end of the series, (making it a 4 patch series) and if there's a discussion about it I'll just skip it and apply the first 3 patches? In the (IMHO more likely) case that there isn't a discussion it saves me from remembering to chase you to send that patch ;)
