[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201007081500.17647.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:00:17 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/18] ima: use generic_file_llseek for securityfs
On Thursday 08 July 2010, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 23:40 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > The default for llseek will change to no_llseek,
> > so securityfs users need to add explicit .llseek
> > assignments. Since we're dealing with regular
> > files from a VFS perspective, use generic_file_llseek.
>
> As both the 'violations' and 'runtime_measurement_counts' are single
> values and 'policy' doesn't support read, this patch doesn't hurt, but
> adding .llseek is probably unnecessary.
Ok, thanks for the confirmation.
Are you applying the patch in your tree, or should I keep it in my
series?
Note that while it may not be necessary to add these specific .llseek
operations, the reason I'm doing it is because I want to provably
have a .llseek operation in every file_operation in the kernel before
the default gets changed.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists