On 6/30/2016 3:33 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Dan Jurgens <danielj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> index 432bed5..3f6780b 100644
>> --- a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
>> @@ -1428,6 +1428,10 @@ struct ib_srq {
>> } ext;
>> };
>>
>> +struct ib_qp_security {
>> + void *q_security;
>> +};
> Sorry, I missed this earlier and didn't realize it until I was going
> through 4/12 ... why both with ib_qp_security? Why not just use a
> straight void pointer?
>
In the RFC series Casey Schaufler asked me to not use void blobs to make module stacking easier. Also, in the IB/Core part of the series much is added to the ib_qp_security structure to track security info needed for proper enforcement.
_______________________________________________
Selinux mailing list
Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
