On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Kees Cook wrote:
>
>> Most architectures don't need to do anything special for the strict
>> seccomp syscall entries. Remove the redundant headers and reduce the
>> others.
>
>> 19 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 137 deletions(-)
>
>
* Kees Cook wrote:
> Most architectures don't need to do anything special for the strict
> seccomp syscall entries. Remove the redundant headers and reduce the
> others.
> 19 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 137 deletions(-)
Lovely cleanup factor.
Just to make sure, are you sure the 32-bit
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org wrote:
* Kees Cook keesc...@chromium.org wrote:
Most architectures don't need to do anything special for the strict
seccomp syscall entries. Remove the redundant headers and reduce the
others.
19 files changed, 27
* Kees Cook keesc...@chromium.org wrote:
Most architectures don't need to do anything special for the strict
seccomp syscall entries. Remove the redundant headers and reduce the
others.
19 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 137 deletions(-)
Lovely cleanup factor.
Just to make sure, are you
Most architectures don't need to do anything special for the strict
seccomp syscall entries. Remove the redundant headers and reduce the
others.
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook
---
v2:
- use Kbuild "generic-y" instead of explicit #include lines (sfr)
---
arch/arm/include/asm/Kbuild | 1 +
Most architectures don't need to do anything special for the strict
seccomp syscall entries. Remove the redundant headers and reduce the
others.
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook keesc...@chromium.org
---
v2:
- use Kbuild generic-y instead of explicit #include lines (sfr)
---
arch/arm/include/asm/Kbuild
6 matches
Mail list logo
