From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261486AbVGCS33 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 14:29:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261487AbVGCS33 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 14:29:29 -0400 Received: from cerebus.immunix.com ([198.145.28.33]:12756 "EHLO ermintrude.int.immunix.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261486AbVGCS30 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Jul 2005 14:29:26 -0400 Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 11:25:05 -0700 From: Tony Jones To: serge@hallyn.com Cc: Greg KH , serue@us.ibm.com, lkml , Chris Wright , Stephen Smalley , James Morris , Andrew Morton , Michael Halcrow , David Safford , Reiner Sailer , Gerrit Huizenga Subject: Re: [patch 5/12] lsm stacking v0.2: actual stacker module Message-ID: <20050703182505.GA29491@immunix.com> References: <20050630194458.GA23439@serge.austin.ibm.com> <20050630195043.GE23538@serge.austin.ibm.com> <20050701203526.GA824@kroah.com> <20050703002441.GA25052@vino.hallyn.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050703002441.GA25052@vino.hallyn.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 02, 2005 at 07:24:41PM -0500, serge@hallyn.com wrote: > Hmm, I could instead have one file per loaded LSM, which could > obviate the need for the stacker/unload file, but that would make > it more work for a user to find the ordering of the LSMs. I wonder > how much that would matter. > > I'll implement your other changes, and consider switching to a > stackerfs (versus changing the content presentation under sysfs). I'd prefer each file (per loaded LSM) when read returned it's ordering position, even though it's much clumsier than your current implementation. There just isn't enough content to justify a stacker specific filesystem IMHO. Tony