From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751652Ab1GMUrL (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:47:11 -0400
Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:44343 "EHLO
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750872Ab1GMUrJ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 13 Jul 2011 16:47:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20110713170657.59dae548@notabene.brown>
References: <20110612130953.GA3709@albatros> <20110706173631.GA5431@albatros>
 <CA+55aFyfjG1h2zkkGai_VPM8p5bhWhvNXs1HvuWMgxv4RSywYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110706185932.GB3299@albatros> <20110707075610.GA3411@albatros>
 <20110707081930.GA4393@albatros> <20110712132723.GA3193@albatros>
 <CA+55aFysXOeBqEvmVbuqL3i0jRFDcE=vDuVhmYL38XQ0+x=deQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110713091408.0d456352@notabene.brown> <20110713063142.GA19976@openwall.com>
 <20110713170657.59dae548@notabene.brown>
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:46:18 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwQKqvNvzTMYXVW_yKkFtNsyv8uuBiWiwYLof-nPqPu9w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] move RLIMIT_NPROC check from set_user() to do_execve_common()
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

It sounds like people are effectively Ack'ing the patch, but with this
kind of patch I don't want to add the "implicit Ack" that I often do
for regular stuff.

So could people who think that the patch is ok in its current form
just send me their acked-by or reviewed-by? I haven't heard any actual
objection to it, and I think it's valid for the current -rc.

Alternatively, feel free to send a comment like "I think it's the
right thing, but maybe it should wait for the next merge window"..

                      Linus