Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 17:53:27 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Michael Kerrisk-manpages <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        Daniel Colascione <dancol@google.com>,
        Jann Horn <jann@thejh.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] signal: use fdget() since we don't allow O_PATH
Message-ID: <20190418155326.nvjzvrhshi4gbib6@brauner.io>
References: <20190418101841.4476-1-christian@brauner.io>
 <20190418101841.4476-4-christian@brauner.io>
 <CAHk-=whB0A_WsBpr3MFujWKi7WW9XLxUpq=z_uYTv+J7uE0wRw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whB0A_WsBpr3MFujWKi7WW9XLxUpq=z_uYTv+J7uE0wRw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 08:37:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:19 AM Christian Brauner <christian@brauner.io> wrote:
> >
> >     It's just semantically correct to use fdget()
> > and return an error right from there instead of taking a reference and
> > returning an error later.
> 
> I've applied this one directly, because it ends up affecting the
> existing code, and I'd rather just have the initial release of
> pidfd_send_signal() right.

Perfect! Thank you!

> 
> The other patches I consider to be "future release" material.

Yes, indeed. Jann and I are targeting the 5.2 merge window if that's ok.

Christian