Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So the LSM must modify the xattr in place? I suppose that since the @value > is allocated to the max size it shouldn't be a problem. Just checking ... ... And the caller must provide a maximally sized buffer (which it likely has to allocate anyway). I'm not sure I really need to provide the modification thing. I suspect a binary keep or discard decision is sufficient. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
