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/
