lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: IMA policy search speedup
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, Kasatkin, Dmitry wrote:

> I looked to <linux/fs.h> and found that there is a possibility to to
> add additional flag for sb->s_flags.
> For example
>
> #define MS_NOT_IMA (1<<25) /* NOT_IMA */
> #define IS_I_NOT_IMA(inode) __IS_FLG(inode, MS_NOT_IMA)
>
>
> Another way is to add additional dedicated integrity related member to
> the sb structure.
> struct super_block {
> ...
> #ifdef CONFIG_INTEGRITY
> int s_integrity;
> #endif
> };
>
> Obviously there are only few super blocks in the system and few bytes
> will not harm.

The flag seems better than adding a new struct member. Why would you need
an int for this?



- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-09-19 07:01    [W:0.061 / U:0.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site