Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/6] Integrity Service API and dummy provider

[Mimi Zohar <zohar@us.ibm.com>]

On 07/25/2006 11:08:17 AM, James Morris wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Jul 2006, Kylene Jo Hall wrote:
>
> > + * @verify_data:
> > + *   Verify the integrity of a dentry.
> > + *   @dentry contains the dentry structure to be verified.
> > + *   Possible return codes are: INTEGRITY_PASS, INTEGRITY_FAIL,
> > + *       INTEGRITY_NOLABEL
> > + *
> > + * @verify_metadata:
> > + *   Verify the integrity of a dentry's metadata; return the value
> > + *    of the requested xattr_name and the verification result of the
> > + *   dentry's metadata.
> > + *   @dentry contains the dentry structure of the metadata to be
verified.
> > + *   @xattr_name, if not null, contains the name of the xattr
> > + *       being requested.
> > + *   @xattr_value, if not null, is a pointer for the xattr value.
> > + *   @xattr_val_len will be set to the length of the xattr value.
> > + *   @xattr_status is the result of the getxattr request for the
xattr.
> > + *   Possible return codes are: INTEGRITY_PASS, INTEGRITY_FAIL,
> > + *      INTEGRITY_NOLABEL, -EOPNOTSUPP, -ENOMEM,
>
> What I would suggest with these API calls is that they always only return

> errno values, and that you pass back the INTEGRITY_ values via a pointer.
>
> This ensures that errno values are cleanly propagated throughout the
> kernel and that 'system' errors are separated from higher level integrity

> service status values.

Yes, that definitely would be cleaner.  We'll include this change in the
next
set of patches.

Thank you.

Mimi Zohar

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