On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 06:17:10PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Jun 2010, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > >>> This version implements buffer locking using event_lock as you > >>> suggested, such that we can proceed with fixing the evdev buffer > >>> problem independently from providing a suitable one-to-many buffer. > >>> > >>> The first patch converts the per-client buffers to a common buffer, > >>> and adds a fixme since the code is expected to be further > >>> improved. The second and third patch includes your review comments. > >> Henrik, > >> > >> Applied to .36 queue with minor adjustments, please take a peek in my > >> 'for-linus' branch and see if you spot anything wrong. > > > > Hi Dmitry, > > > > I guess you forgot to push it to kernel.org? Last change I see in your > > tree is 6 days old. > > > > Thanks, > > > > ... which seems like a lucky strike; the patch has a blatant security hole, > leaking grabbed events to listening clients after ungrab. I sent an updated > patch to Dmitry earlier today, in a brown paper bag. Not knowing if the original > patch was actually applied or not, I thought I had better hold on to the change > just a little bit. > Sorry, just getting back from vacation, the mails escaped when I synced the mailbox at an airport but I indeed did not push the patcehs out yet. I should be operable in a day or so and sort everything out. Thanks. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
