Re: [PATCH 1/2] LSM: switch to blocking policy update notifiers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 6/5/2019 9:51 AM, Janne Karhunen wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:23 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >>> -int call_lsm_notifier(enum lsm_event event, void *data);
> >>> -int register_lsm_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> >>> -int unregister_lsm_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> >>> +int call_blocking_lsm_notifier(enum lsm_event event, void *data);
> >>> +int register_blocking_lsm_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> >>> +int unregister_blocking_lsm_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> >> Why is it important to change the names of these hooks?
> >> It's not like you had call_atomic_lsm_notifier() before.
> >> It seems like a lot of unnecessary code churn.
> > Paul was thinking there will eventually be two sets of notifiers
> > (atomic and blocking) and this creates the clear separation.
>
> One hook with an added "bool blocking" argument, if
> that's the only difference?

I think there is value in keeping a similar convention to the notifier
code on which this is based, see include/linux/notifier.h.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Kernel Hardening]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux