On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:59:57PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:35:19 +0000 jeffxu@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > >> This patchset proposes a new mseal() syscall for the Linux kernel. > > > > I have not moved this into mm-stable for a 6.10 merge. Mainly because > > of the total lack of Reviewed-by:s and Acked-by:s. > > > > The code appears to be stable enough for a merge. > > > > It's awkward that we're in conference this week, but I ask people to > > give consideration to the desirability of moving mseal() into mainline > > sometime over the next week, please. > > I hate to be obnoxious, but I *was* copied ... :) > > Not taking a position on merging, but I have to ask: are we convinced at > this point that mseal() isn't a chrome-only system call? Did we ever > see the glibc patches that were promised? I think _this_ version of mseal() is OpenBSD's mimmutable() with a basically unused extra 'flags' argument. As such, we have an existance proof that it's useful beyond Chrome. I think Liam still had concerns around the walk-the-vmas-twice-to-error-out-early part of the implementation? Although we can always fix the implementation later; changing the API is hard.
