Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752668AbdLGAAs (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:00:48 -0500 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:42052 "EHLO aserp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752111AbdLGAAq (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:00:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:00:31 +1100 (AEDT) From: James Morris X-X-Sender: james.l.morris@localhost To: Sargun Dhillon cc: Casey Schaufler , LSM , Kees Cook , Igor Stoppa , LKML Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Safe, dynamically (un)loadable LSMs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20171126221545.GA13751@ircssh-2.c.rugged-nimbus-611.internal> <8c8dd781-d30a-7105-011d-127cf5188426@schaufler-ca.com> <866f86cf-d28a-3da7-4a2d-cbc5a330bd4a@schaufler-ca.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LFD 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=8737 signatures=668643 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1712060332 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 557 Lines: 18 On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, Sargun Dhillon wrote: > Should I respin this patch sans module unloading? Still a set of dynamic > hooks that are independent to allow for sealable memory support. Yes, please. > I'm also wondering what people think of the fs change? I don't think > that it makes a lot of sense just having one giant list. I was thinking > it might make more sense using the module_name instead. I don't know how useful this will be in practice. Who/what will be looking at these entries and why? -- James Morris