Re: Early initialization of security modules

Previous message: Chris Wright: "Re: [RFC] No more module_* hooks"
In reply to: Greg KH: "Re: Early initialization of security modules"
Next in thread: Greg KH: "Re: Early initialization of security modules"
Reply: Greg KH: "Re: Early initialization of security modules"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

chrisat_private

* Greg KH (gregat_private) wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 12:39:50AM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > 
> > I think it could be useful.  This is not well-abstracted, but IIRC it
> > works fine when last tested.
> 
> Why not just use the existing _initcall levels instead of creating a new
> one?  Isn't one of them early enough for security modules to use?

These happen late.  All of them happen at the same time (essentially).
During do_initcalls(), the only ordering is _when_ in do_initcalls().
This misses a lot of earier initializations.

thanks,
-chris
-- 
Linux Security Modules     http://lsm.immunix.org     http://lsm.bkbits.net
_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module