Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Arnaud Ebalard
Date: Saturday, August 23, 2008 - 9:03 am

Hi,

Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> writes:


Hence the note on hardware similarities of both device outside
endianness. 


+1


All Linux 2.6.26 (initial and stable releases) are not affected. I am
currently running 2.6.26.3.


As I wrote in my previous email, bisecting net-2.6 lead me to 
9043476f726802f4b00c96d0c4f418dde48d1304 ([PATCH] sanitize proc_sysctl)
which is in the middle of a set of fs/sysctl related patches. 

I think I am missing the point on what you want me to do. Can you
clarify? 

Thanks for your work.

Cheers,

a+
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression, Arnaud Ebalard, (Sat Aug 23, 9:03 am)
Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression, Al Viro, (Sat Aug 23, 10:02 am)
Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression, Arnaud Ebalard, (Sat Aug 23, 10:13 am)
Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression, Al Viro, (Sat Aug 23, 11:16 am)
Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression, Arnaud Ebalard, (Sat Aug 23, 2:09 pm)
Re: [bisected] Weird sysctl regression, Al Viro, (Sun Aug 24, 4:54 am)