Re: [PATCH] 4/5: LSM hooks rework

[Kurt Garloff]

Hi Rik,

On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:54:07AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Kurt Garloff wrote:
> 
> >The case that security_ops points to the default capability_
> >security_ops is the fast path and arguably the more likely one
> >on most systems.
> 
> Quite a few distributions ship with other security modules
> enabled by default, so I'm not sure we should add a "likely"
> here - let the CPU's branch prediction sort things out.

Fine with me. I had the fast path in mind, but with some
luck, CPU branch prediction will work for us.

I sent out the full patch set, which moves the code from
vanilla to the code we've been shipping since 7 months.
And I made the changes in the order to make the ones that I
expect the least controversial come first.

If we can't find consensus for patches 4 and 5, I'd still
think applying 1 -- 3 is useful.

Regards,
-- 
Kurt Garloff, Director SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature