On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Chris Wright wrote: > > i see no immediate reason not to include this patch. do you think this > hook is sufficient for SECURE_SHM? the shm_close() vm_op gets called > during __exit_mm() (so we don't have to wait for parent in wait4), > right? In this case, yes, the shm_close() hook is sufficient. shm_exit() just walks through all of the shared memory segments created by the exiting process and destroys them if no other process is attached to them. Since __exit_mm() calls close (and our hook marks them destroyable if there is nothing else attached to them) which calls destroy, the same behavior takes place, and takes place at the right time so we don't have to put that behavior in the task_ops->free_security hook where it wouldn't get called until after we wait for the parent. Thanks! That is good news. Emily -- Emily Ratliff IBM Linux Technology Center, Security _______________________________________________ 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 Jan 16 2002 - 08:30:43 PST