Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules

Previous message: David Mosberger: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
In reply to: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Next in thread: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Next in thread: Christoph Hellwig: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Reply: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

chrisat_private

* Andi Kleen (akat_private) wrote:
> 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.
> 
> I would give them a generic name then in case someone else needs that too, 
> like "early_initcalls" 

I orginally thought it would be nice to make it generic, but it's
location is somewhat specific to the security hooks.  It seems there is
easily tension between conflicting needs, should be earlier...should be
later, so I made it specific.  Is there currently a need?

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