On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 10:17 AM Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 10:05 AM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:15 AM Stephen Smalley > > <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 9:59 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > After the RCU conversion, it is possible to simply check the policy > > > > pointer against NULL instead. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Looks fine to me as well, but it doesn't merge cleanly and since you > > are already respinning patch 1/3 I figured I would just bail on this > > patch and let you take care ot it. > > > > I would suggest dropping patch 2/3 from the patchset, respinning > > patches 1/3 and 3/3, and reposting them for inclusion into > > selinux/next. That's likely the quickest way forward on these. > > Technically 3/3 isn't safe without 2/3 (or some replacement for it, > e.g. moving the policycaps array into struct selinux_policy as > suggested by Ondrej). Then just respin 1/3 and we'll deal with the other bits later. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com
