Re: [RFC] LSM fix for stupid "empty" functions

From: James Morris (jmorris@intercode.com.au)
Date: Sun Dec 01 2002 - 21:00:27 EST


On Sun, 1 Dec 2002, Greg KH wrote:

> > I think we still want to make sure that the module author has explicitly
> > accounted for all of the hooks, in case new hooks are added.
>
> But with this patch, if the module author hasn't specified a hook, they
> get the "dummy" ones. So the structure should always be full of
> pointers, making the VERIFY_STRUCT macro pointless.

Yes, but defaulting unspecified hooks to dummy operations could be
dangerous. A module might appear to compile and run perfectly well, but
be missing some important new hook.

- James

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@intercode.com.au>

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



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 22:00:11 EST