On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Kasatkin, Dmitry wrote:
> I looked to <linux/fs.h> and found that there is a possibility to to
> add additional flag for sb->s_flags.
> For example
>
> #define MS_NOT_IMA (1<<25) /* NOT_IMA */
> #define IS_I_NOT_IMA(inode) __IS_FLG(inode, MS_NOT_IMA)
>
>
> Another way is to add additional dedicated integrity related member to
> the sb structure.
> struct super_block {
> ...
> #ifdef CONFIG_INTEGRITY
> int s_integrity;
> #endif
> };
>
> Obviously there are only few super blocks in the system and few bytes
> will not harm.
The flag seems better than adding a new struct member. Why would you need
an int for this?
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
