Re: [PATCH try #2] security: Convert LSM into a static interface

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting James Morris (jmorris@xxxxxxxxx):
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2007, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> 
> > Patch tests fine for me for expected capability behavior with lsm=n,
> > lsm=y, lsm=y+capability=y, lsm=y+selinux=y, and lsm=y+caps=y+selinux=y.
> > 
> > So while I'm opposed to the patch, it appears to be safe.
> 
> I've also tested a bunch of scenarios: allmodconfig, lsm=y,cap=n, 
> selinux=y,cap=n  etc.

I was wondering about the uninlining of all those functions, so did a
set of performance runs.  Found no statistically relevant change in
dbench, tbench, or reaim.  (tried to run kernbench too but the benchmark
failed somewhere and i didn't care enough to look into it)

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