Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:44:51 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     "Guozihua (Scott)" <guozihua@huawei.com>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zohar@linux.ibm.com,
        paul@paul-moore.com, luhuaxin1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 0/3] Backport handling -ESTALE policy update failure
 to 4.19
Message-ID: <Y9y7c5sEX5phLybE@kroah.com>
References: <20230201023952.30247-1-guozihua@huawei.com>
 <Y9vw6RhQ6KJ5+E1I@sashalap>
 <02723ce8-0ad4-7860-b76c-7d2b30710dcf@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <02723ce8-0ad4-7860-b76c-7d2b30710dcf@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 09:10:13AM +0800, Guozihua (Scott) wrote:
> On 2023/2/3 1:20, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 10:39:49AM +0800, GUO Zihua wrote:
> >> This series backports patches in order to resolve the issue discussed
> >> here:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/389334fe-6e12-96b2-6ce9-9f0e8fcb85bf@huawei.com/
> >>
> >> This required backporting the non-blocking LSM policy update mechanism
> >> prerequisite patches.
> > 
> > Do we not need this on newer kernels? Why only 4.19?
> > 
> Hi Sasha.
> 
> The issue mentioned in this patch was fixed already in the newer kernel.
> All three patches here are backports from mainline.

Ok, now queued up, thanks.

greg k-h