Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules

Previous message: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
In reply to: Chris Wright: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Next in thread: Chris Wright: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Next in thread: Sam Ravnborg: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Reply: Chris Wright: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

hchat_private

On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 10:20:00PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> This is too late.  Those are just for order in do_initcalls() which is
> well after some kernel threads have been created and filesystems have been
> mounted, etc.  This patch allows statically linked modules to catch
> the creation of such kernel objects and give them all consistent labels.

Patch looks fine to me.  Could you please make the initcalls mandatory for security
modules and remove the module exports for the regioster functions so peop can't
do the crappy check for each module whether it's already initialized stuff the early selinux
for LSM versions did?
_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module