Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs

On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 16:15 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
> To remove conditionally passing of vfsmounts to the LSM, a nameidata
> struct can be instantiated in the nfsd and mqueue filesystems.  This
> however results in useless information being passed down, as not
> all fields in the nameidata struct will be meaingful.  The nameidata
> struct is split creating struct nameidata2 that contains only the
> fields
> that will carry meaningful information.

I don't object to the concept per se, but could you please give it a
more descriptive name please? "struct vfs_intent" would be a lot more
accurate than "nameidata2".

Trond

-
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: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
    • From: Andreas Gruenbacher <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
    • From: [email protected]

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] LinuxPPS (with new syscalls API)
• Next by Date: Re: [AppArmor 00/44] AppArmor security module overview
• Previous by thread: [RFD 4/4] Pass nameidata2 to permission() from nfsd_permission()
• Next by thread: Re: [RFD 0/4] AppArmor - Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create/lookup/permission IOPs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

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