On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 2:27 AM, Daniel Borkmann <dbork...@redhat.com> wrote: > Arent't you doing here a similar thing in terms of getting arch as Eric > criticized (Nicolas' implementation does not use that part btw.)? Also, > even if it would be possible here, now your 2 JIT implementations differ > in behaviour. I think this is unintended.
Eric's comment was about x86, where the audit arch could change on the fly. For ARM, the audit arch doesn't change---syscall_get_arch() always returns AUDIT_ARCH_ARM. > Besides all that, I think I also pointed you to a patch that already made > it in for ARM, not sure why you keep posting the ARM JIT implementation? That's why I asked in the other post if you wanted me to rebase against linux-next or net-next. The ARM part 3/3 is not needed if rebased against linux-next with Nicolas's patches. - xi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
