Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 07:36:16 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Iurii Zaikin <yzaikin@google.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pass kernel pointers to the sysctl ->proc_handler method v3
Message-ID: <20200427053616.GC15905@lst.de>
References: <20200424064338.538313-1-hch@lst.de> <20200426155958.GS23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200426155958.GS23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 04:59:58PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> OK, I can live with that; further work can live on top of that, anyway.
> How are we going to handle that?  I can put it into never-rebased branch
> in vfs.git (#work.sysctl), so that people could pull that.
> 
> FWIW, I'm putting together more uaccess stuff (will probably hit -next
> tonight or tomorrow); this would fit well there...

Sounds good to me.  The first patch isn't really needed for the series
and could go in through the bpf tree.