On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 09:50:51PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote: > On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 10:58:50AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 11:06:44AM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote: > > > Version 2 of Greg's patch series with changes made as suggested by > > > comments to V1. > > > > > > Applies on top of Linus' current development tree > > > > > > a8c964eacb21288b2dbfa9d80cee5968a3b8fb21 > > > > > > V1 cover letter: > > > > > > Here's a short patch series from Chris Fries and Dave Weinstein that > > > implements some new restrictions when printing out kernel pointers, as > > > well as the ability to whitelist kernel pointers where needed. > > > > > > These patches are based on work from William Roberts, and also are > > > inspired by grsecurity's %pP to specifically whitelist a kernel pointer, > > > where it is always needed, like the last patch in the series shows, in > > > the UIO drivers (UIO requires that you know the address, it's a hardware > > > address, nothing wrong with seeing that...) > > > > > > I haven't done much to this patch series, only forward porting it from > > > an older kernel release (4.4) and a few minor tweaks. [snip] > > > > Nice! Thanks for doing this work, looks great to me. Care to resend > > the next version as a "real" one (i.e. no RFC)? > > First thing tomorrow! > > Is correct protocol for me to add your Signed-off-by tag to each patch from > this RFC? Or is the > protocol for you to add the tag yourself when the real version is posted?
You can add my signed-off-by to your new patches, they shouldn't change much with the exception of: > I intend splitting one of the patches into two as suggested by Will. And that's fine to keep my s-o-b for. thanks for asking, greg k-h
