Re: [PATCH] security.h updates

Previous message: Ciprian Iftode: "(no subject)"
In reply to: Stephen Smalley: "Re: [PATCH] security.h updates"
Next in thread: Stephen Smalley: "Re: [PATCH] security.h updates"
Next in thread: Seth Arnold: "Re: [PATCH] security.h updates"
Reply: Stephen Smalley: "Re: [PATCH] security.h updates"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

chrisat_private

* Stephen Smalley (sdsat_private) wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Chris Wright wrote:
> 
> > > Well, much of the networking code can run under interrupt -- I'm not sure
> > > it's something we need to document here.
> > 
> > yeah, i wanted to start docuementing this.  i see no reason to leave
> > this information out of the docs.
> 
> I would like to see explicit comments about being called from interrupt
> for hooks like sock_rcv_skb and send_sigiotask, but I don't know if
> it is really necessary to mention it individually for the skb and
> NetFilter hooks - we can just cover those hooks with a single comment.
> Also, we should warn about blocking operations in general, not just memory
> allocation.

alright, i'll commit the bind/connect/listen doc changes, the type-o's
from setsockopt, and the prototype change of skb_ops->clone.

we can work on better comments for bottom half calls, and when it's safe
to block.

thanks,
-chris

_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module