On Fri, 2008-03-07 at 01:25 +1100, James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > Ok, this makes a lot more sense. These defintively should be different > > hooks in that case, and no matter what name they have (no good ideas > > from me either currently) > > Perhaps setsecctx and storesecctx ? Or possibly notifysecctx (notify security module of a secctx value for the inode) vs. setsecctx (set this sectx on this inode, including both in-core update and invoking the __vfs_setxattr_noperm helper). -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.
