Re: [patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n

On Thursday 13 July 2006 03:51, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 23:07:32 +0200
>
> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Despite good resons to apply the patch, it has not been applied yet,
> > with no explanation.
>
> I queued the below.  Andrea claims that it'll reduce seccomp overhead to
> literally zero.

Chuck's patch - possibly with Linus' rename - is better.

-Andi

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Re: [patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: possible dos / wsize affected frozen connection length
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] [MMC] Change SDHCI version error to a warning
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] TIF_NOTSC and SECCOMP prctl
• Next by thread: Re: [patch] let CONFIG_SECCOMP default to n
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]