[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <83818a21-ef3d-8c47-dd95-82272ca85622@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 09:55:52 -0700
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Aaron Goidel <acgoide@...ho.nsa.gov>, paul@...l-moore.com
Cc: selinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, dhowells@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz,
amir73il@...il.com, jmorris@...ei.org, sds@...ho.nsa.gov,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
casey@...aufler-ca.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] fanotify, inotify, dnotify, security: add security
hook for fs notifications
On 7/10/2019 9:49 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 7/10/19 9:38 AM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 7/10/2019 6:34 AM, Aaron Goidel wrote:
>>> @@ -3261,6 +3262,26 @@ static int selinux_inode_removexattr(struct dentry *dentry, const char *name)
>>> return -EACCES;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int selinux_inode_notify(struct inode *inode, u64 mask)
>>> +{
>>> + u32 perm = FILE__WATCH; // basic permission, can a watch be set?
>> We don't use // comments in the Linux kernel.
>>
> I thought that we had recently moved into the 21st century on that issue,
> but I don't see it mentioned in coding-style.rst. Maybe we need a Doc update.
Really? Yuck. Next thing you know M4 macros will be allowed.
>
> checkpatch allows C99 comments by default.
> Joe, do you recall about this?
>
> thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists