On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:48 PM, Dave Quigley <dpquigl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 1/23/2013 1:31 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 08:40 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote: >>> From: David Quigley <dpquigl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> There is a time where we need to calculate a context without the >>> inode having been created yet. To do this we take the negative dentry and >>> calculate a context based on the process and the parent directory contexts. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Matthew N. Dodd <Matthew.Dodd@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Miguel Rodel Felipe <Rodel_FM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Phua Eu Gene <PHUA_Eu_Gene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Khin Mi Mi Aung <Mi_Mi_AUNG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> include/linux/security.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> security/capability.c | 8 ++++++++ >>> security/security.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>> security/selinux/hooks.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 4 files changed, 80 insertions(+) >> >> Linus won't accept a patch that changes the security code from Bruce or >> myself without acks from the security maintainers. I assume that means >> we need to get at least an ack from James Morris, and then possibly >> Stephen and Eric too... >> >> > > I have an email from James Morris saying that the changes should go through your tree. Should I get him to ack these patches so you can pass them through? > > Dave Please do, yes. Otherwise Linus will usually delay the pull while he asks for one. Cheers Trond-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
