Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> NAK, I really utterly dislike that inatomic argument. The alloc side
> doesn't function in atomic context either. Please keep the thing
> symmetric in that regards.
Excuse me. kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL) may sleep (and therefore cannot be used in
atomic context). However, kfree() f
Cong Wang wrote:
> Sean Hefty wrote:
> > I like this version, thanks! I'm not sure which tree to merge it through.
> > Are you needing this for 2.6.34, or is 2.6.35 okay?
> >
>
> As soon as possible, so 2.6.34. :)
>
Cong, merge window for 2.6.34 was already closed.
You need to make your patchse
Cong Wang wrote:
> Oh, IIUC, TOMOYO is something like SELinux?
Yes. It is a policy based mandatory access control implementation which is
applied to not only non root users but also root user. If MAC is enabled,
root user cannot freely modify via sysctl() or /proc/sys interface.
> So, it is somew
Cong Wang wrote:
> The problem is that there are some existing applications which use
> fixed port number, we don't have chances to change this for them,
> thus making them working is desired, so they want to reserve these
> port for those applications.
>
> For example, if I have an appliction whi
David Miller wrote:
> > Octavian Purdila wrote:
> >>
> >> int inet_is_reserved_local_port(int port)
> >> {
> >>if (test_bit(port, reserved_ports))
> >>return 1;
> >>return 0;
> >> }
> >>
> > Above check is exactly what I'm doing in the LSM hook.
>
> But his version can be don
Octavian Purdila wrote:
>
> int inet_is_reserved_local_port(int port)
> {
> if (test_bit(port, reserved_ports))
> return 1;
> return 0;
> }
>
Above check is exactly what I'm doing in the LSM hook.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" i
Hello.
Amerigo Wang wrote:
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> index 2b79377..d3e160a 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> @@ -456,6 +456,8 @@ int __inet_hash_connect(struct inet_timewait_death_row
> *death_row,
>
