Re: [PATCH 3/4] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM)

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 09:52:13AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> We started out with the integrity_inode_permission() hook call in 
> inode_permission(), but because of the removal of the nameidata 
> parameter in the last merge, based on discussions
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-security-module&m=121797845308246&w=2,
> the call to integrity_inode_permission() was moved up to the caller,
> where either a file or path are available.  Any suggestions?

vfs_permission and file_permission are just small wrappers around
inode_permission.  In hindsight they actualyl were a wrong idea and
will probably go away in the not so distant future.  Note that there
are various callers of inode_permission that don't have a vfsmount
anywhere near.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/