On 1/23/2013 1:31 PM, Myklebust, Trond wrote:
On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 08:40 -0500, Steve Dickson wrote:
From: David Quigley <dpquigl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
There is a time where we need to calculate a context without the
inode having been created yet. To do this we take the negative dentry and
calculate a context based on the process and the parent directory contexts.
Signed-off-by: Matthew N. Dodd <Matthew.Dodd@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Miguel Rodel Felipe <Rodel_FM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Phua Eu Gene <PHUA_Eu_Gene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Khin Mi Mi Aung <Mi_Mi_AUNG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/security.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
security/capability.c | 8 ++++++++
security/security.c | 10 ++++++++++
security/selinux/hooks.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 80 insertions(+)
Linus won't accept a patch that changes the security code from Bruce or
myself without acks from the security maintainers. I assume that means
we need to get at least an ack from James Morris, and then possibly
Stephen and Eric too...
I have an email from James Morris saying that the changes should go
through your tree. Should I get him to ack these patches so you can pass
them through?
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
