On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 02:52:47AM -0400, James Morris wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jul 2005, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > Good idea. Here's a patch to do just that (compile tested only...)
> >
> > Comments?
>
> Looks promising so far.
>
> I'm currently porting selinuxfs funtionality to securityfs, although I'm
> not sure if we'll be ok during early initialization. selinuxfs is
> currently kern_mounted via an initcall. We may need an initcall
> kern_mount() of securityfs before SELinux kicks in.
Sure, I don't mind moving this if needed.
> Otherwise, it looks like it'll allow SELinux to drop some code. Generally
> it will mean that other LSM components won't have to create their own
> filesystems, and their subdirectories will be hanging off /security (or
> wherever selinuxfs is mounted), rather than scattered across /
The code creates /sys/kernel/security as a mount point for securityfs.
This will make the LSB people happy that every LSM does not create a new
fs in / :)
> Some of the SELinux code may be useful as part of securityfs later, as
> well.
That would be fine.
> How about having all API functions which return a pointer be converted to
> use ERR_PTR() ?
>
> This will allow errors to be propagated to the calling code.
Good point, will change that.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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/
[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]
| |
 |