Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module

Thanks for all your comments.

Quoting Greg KH ([email protected]):
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 02:50:43PM -0500, [email protected] wrote:
> > +/* variables to hold kobject/sysfs data */
> > +static struct subsystem stacker_subsys;
> 
> Use decl_subsys please.
> 
> And yes, James is right, only value per sysfs file is allowed.

Hmm, I could instead have one file per loaded LSM, which could
obviate the need for the stacker/unload file, but that would make
it more work for a user to find the ordering of the LSMs.  I wonder
how much that would matter.

I'll implement your other changes, and consider switching to a
stackerfs (versus changing the content presentation under sysfs).

thanks,
-serge
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module
    • From: Tony Jones <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module
    • From: Greg KH <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Problem with inotify
• Next by Date: ramdisk max size limitation?
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]