Re: New stacker performance results

From: Tony Jones (tony@private)
Date: Wed May 25 2005 - 18:38:37 PDT

On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 09:32:31PM -0400, James Morris wrote:

> It's a burden in that it needs to be taken into account by several core
> and other kernel maintainers when they modify the kernel or review patches
> which modify the kernel.  If SELinux is to be the only user, then it's
> difficult to justify the continued presence of the LSM code.

But the LSM hooks aren't going to just dissapear. Under what you propose they 
will be replaced by other SELinux specific calls.  How does this change the 
impact to core/other kernel maintainers when they make changes? They are
still going to be faced with making changes near call points whose purpose
they may not be overly familiar with.  Are you saying that the issue is the
lack of availability of source for the LSM module? You've already said that as
far as they are concerned SELinux is the only LSM module that matters and it's
source is intree.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Wed May 25 2005 - 18:42:23 PDT