On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Tetsuo Handa
<penguin-ker...@i-love.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> Suggested changes on top of your patch:
>
> Replace "struct hlist_head *head" in "struct security_hook_list" with
> "const unsigned int offset" because there is no need to initialize with
> address of the immutable/mutable chains.
>
> Remove LSM_HOOK_INIT_MUTABLE() by embedding just offset (in bytes) from
> head of "struct security_hook_heads" into "struct
> security_hook_list"->offset.
>
> Make "struct security_hook_heads security_hook_heads" and
> "struct security_hook_heads security_hook_heads_mutable" local variables.
>
> Rename "struct security_hook_heads security_hook_heads" to
> "struct security_hook_heads security_mutable_hook_heads" and mark it as
> __ro_after_init.
>
> Add the fourth argument to security_add_hooks() which specifies to which
> chain (security_{mutable|immutable}_hook_heads) to connect.
>
> Make all built-in LSM modules (except SELinux if
> CONFIG_SECURITY_SELINUX_DISABLE=y) be connected to
> security_immutable_hook_heads.
>
> Rename __lsm_ro_after_init to __selinux_ro_after_init which is local to
> SELinux.
>
> Mark "struct security_hook_list"->hook const because it won't change.
>
> Mark "struct security_hook_list"->lsm const because none of
> security_add_hooks() callers are ready to modify the third argument.
>
> Remove SECURITY_HOOK_COUNT and "struct security_hook_list"->owner and
> the exception in randomize_layout_plugin.c because preventing module
> unloading won't work as expected.
>
Rather than completely removing the unloading code, might it make
sense to add a BUG_ON or WARN_ON, in security_delete_hooks if
allow_unload_module is false, and owner is not NULL?
