On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 10:38:33AM -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote: > > I would suggest a further revision to the alloc_security routines. > Since a pointer to the full structure is passed to the routine, > let the routine set the security field itself if it desires and > have it merely return an integer status to indicate error conditions. > That allows a security module to choose not to use the security field > at all for some structures (e.g. not all modules may care about the > struct super_block security field or the struct file security field), > and it allows the module to use the field arbitrarily (e.g. using > the void* to store an integer rather than a pointer). That makes more sense, I'll make that change right now. thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed May 09 2001 - 09:37:31 PDT