On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 3:56 PM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 8:05 PM KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This config influences the nature of the static key that guards the > > static call for LSM hooks. > > No further comment on the rest of this patch series yet, this just > happened to bubble to the top of my inbox and I wanted to comment > quickly - I'm not in favor of adding a Kconfig option for something I understand, I will send the v3 with the patch for reference and we can drop it, if that's the consensus. > like this. If you have an extremely well defined use case then you > can probably do the work to figure out the "correct" value for the > tunable, but for a general purpose kernel build that will have > different LSMs active, a variety of different BPF LSM hook > implementations at different times, etc. there is little hope to > getting this right. No thank you. > > -- > paul-moore.com
