[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACLa4puuwbvSibSk2Q4t732jAyf=ncTMvYe_57opNTEz-2NLWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 15:15:57 -0500
From: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Kasatkin, Dmitry" <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ima: policy search speedup
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> The "IS_PRIVATE()" thing is more a "if you know a-priori that you
> aren't interested in pseudo-filesystems, you can already check that
> bit, because it will be set for things like /proc and shmem mappings
> and pipes etc".
I know it isn't relevant to the final solution, but this is simply
wrong. IS_PRIVATE() means 'this inode is filesystem internal.' It is
not used by anything except rieser and the anon_inode. If it is used
by psuedo filesystems in general, like /proc, shmem mappings, and
pipes that is a huge bug and is absolutely wrong.
You are correct IS_PRIVATE is sufficient to know you don't need to do
any IMA stuff with that inode, but it is used in damn few places and
better remain that way....
-Eric
--
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