Re: [PATCH] Early init for security modules

From: Chris Wright (chrisat_private)
Date: Mon May 19 2003 - 17:57:44 PDT

  • Next message: supportat_private: "Re: Movie"

    * Christoph Hellwig (hchat_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.
    > 
    > 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?
    
    I absolutely agree the preconditions aren't nice, but not all security modules
    need them.  I don't think disabling dynamic loading needs to be a
    requirement for the initcall.
    
    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
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 19 2003 - 18:00:32 PDT