On 07/19/2018 09:53 PM, Roman Gushchin wrote: >> Vlastimil > Overall the patchset looks solid to me. > Please, feel free to add > Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@xxxxxx> Thanks! > Two small nits: > 1) The last patch is unrelated to the main idea, > and can potentially cause ABI breakage. Yes, that's why it's last. > I'd separate it from the rest of the patchset. It's not independent though because there would be conflicts. It has to be decided if it goes before of after the rest. Putting it last in the series makes the order clear and makes it possible to revert it in case it does break any users, without disrupting the rest of the series. > 2) It's actually re-opening the security issue for SLOB > users. Is the memory overhead really big enough to > justify that? I assume that anyone choosing SLOB has a tiny embedded device which runs only pre-flashed code, so that's less of an issue. If somebody can trigger the issue remotely, there are likely also other ways to exhaust the limited memory there? > Thanks!
