S_PRIVATE is totally unacceptable as it has a meaning across all LSMs, not just IMA. S_NOSEC means 'this is not setuid or setgid and we don't need to do those checks on modify' You are going to need to use a S_NOIMA. Of Dmitry's 90,000 fewer policy lookups using the per sb flag, how many of them are the same inode over and over again which would be circumvented using S_NOIMA per inode flag? On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, 2012-12-11 at 11:10 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> Anyway, the whole "you can do it at file granularity" isn't the bulk >> of my argument (the "we already have the field that makes sense" is). >> But my point is that per-inode is not only the logically more >> straightforward place to do it, it's also the much more flexible place >> to do it. Because it *allows* for things like that. > > Ok. To summarize, S_IMA indicates that there is a rule and that the iint > was allocated. To differentiate between 'haven't looked/don't know' and > 'definitely not', we need another bit. For this, you're suggesting > using IS_PRIVATE()? Hopefully, I misunderstood. > > thanks, > > Mimi > > > -- 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
