[Linux-stable-mirror] Apply "security/keys: add CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT to Kconfig" to stable trees
Hi,
Is it possible to apply this commit to the stable trees before 4.12?
commit 47b2c3fff4932e6fc17ce13d51a43c6969714e20 Author: Bilal Amarni bilal.amarni@gmail.com Date: Thu Jun 8 14:47:26 2017 +0100
security/keys: add CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT to Kconfig
In commit 20f06ed9f61a ("KEYS: 64-bit MIPS needs to use compat_sys_keyctl for 32-bit userspace"), the keyctl syscall for 32-bit MIPS was "fixed" to point at compat_sys_keyctl instead of sys_keyctl. Unfortunately this caused the syscall to always return ENOSYS because CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT was not enabled on MIPS. Instead of fixing this by manually by enabling KEYS_COMPAT in the MIPS Kconfig, I think applying the above commit is a better.
Thanks, James
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:57:27AM +0000, James Cowgill wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to apply this commit to the stable trees before 4.12?
commit 47b2c3fff4932e6fc17ce13d51a43c6969714e20 Author: Bilal Amarni bilal.amarni@gmail.com Date: Thu Jun 8 14:47:26 2017 +0100
security/keys: add CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT to KconfigIn commit 20f06ed9f61a ("KEYS: 64-bit MIPS needs to use compat_sys_keyctl for 32-bit userspace"), the keyctl syscall for 32-bit MIPS was "fixed" to point at compat_sys_keyctl instead of sys_keyctl. Unfortunately this caused the syscall to always return ENOSYS because CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT was not enabled on MIPS. Instead of fixing this by manually by enabling KEYS_COMPAT in the MIPS Kconfig, I think applying the above commit is a better.
Sounds resonable, but how far back should it go? 4.9 makes sense, but stuff older than that? 4.4? 4.1? 3.16?
thanks,
greg k-h
Hi,
On 16/11/17 13:12, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:57:27AM +0000, James Cowgill wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to apply this commit to the stable trees before 4.12?
commit 47b2c3fff4932e6fc17ce13d51a43c6969714e20 Author: Bilal Amarni bilal.amarni@gmail.com Date: Thu Jun 8 14:47:26 2017 +0100
security/keys: add CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT to KconfigIn commit 20f06ed9f61a ("KEYS: 64-bit MIPS needs to use compat_sys_keyctl for 32-bit userspace"), the keyctl syscall for 32-bit MIPS was "fixed" to point at compat_sys_keyctl instead of sys_keyctl. Unfortunately this caused the syscall to always return ENOSYS because CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT was not enabled on MIPS. Instead of fixing this by manually by enabling KEYS_COMPAT in the MIPS Kconfig, I think applying the above commit is a better.
Sounds resonable, but how far back should it go? 4.9 makes sense, but stuff older than that? 4.4? 4.1? 3.16?
I'm most interested in 4.9, but I think it should go in all versions which have 20f06ed9f61a applied, which includes all the current longterm kernels as far as I can see.
Thanks, James
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 02:10:15PM +0000, James Cowgill wrote:
Hi,
On 16/11/17 13:12, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:57:27AM +0000, James Cowgill wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to apply this commit to the stable trees before 4.12?
commit 47b2c3fff4932e6fc17ce13d51a43c6969714e20 Author: Bilal Amarni bilal.amarni@gmail.com Date: Thu Jun 8 14:47:26 2017 +0100
security/keys: add CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT to KconfigIn commit 20f06ed9f61a ("KEYS: 64-bit MIPS needs to use compat_sys_keyctl for 32-bit userspace"), the keyctl syscall for 32-bit MIPS was "fixed" to point at compat_sys_keyctl instead of sys_keyctl. Unfortunately this caused the syscall to always return ENOSYS because CONFIG_KEYS_COMPAT was not enabled on MIPS. Instead of fixing this by manually by enabling KEYS_COMPAT in the MIPS Kconfig, I think applying the above commit is a better.
Sounds resonable, but how far back should it go? 4.9 makes sense, but stuff older than that? 4.4? 4.1? 3.16?
I'm most interested in 4.9, but I think it should go in all versions which have 20f06ed9f61a applied, which includes all the current longterm kernels as far as I can see.
Ok, now applied, but there was some arm64 stuff that didn't match up...
thanks,
greg k-h
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Greg KH -
James Cowgill