From: Kurt Garloff <garloff@suse.de>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: Linux kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@suse.de>,
James Morris <jmorris@redhat.com>, Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 4/5: LSM hooks rework
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 00:27:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050214232757.GJ18744@tpkurt.garloff.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0502141152560.14001@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 952 bytes --]
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 #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-14 23:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-13 21:05 [PATCH] 0/5: " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-13 21:10 ` [PATCH] 1/5: " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-13 21:11 ` [PATCH] 2/5: " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-13 21:11 ` [PATCH] 3/5: " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-13 21:12 ` [PATCH] 4/5: " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-13 21:12 ` [PATCH] 5/5: " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-14 16:50 ` James Morris
2005-02-14 23:23 ` Kurt Garloff
2005-02-14 16:54 ` [PATCH] 4/5: " Rik van Riel
2005-02-14 23:27 ` Kurt Garloff [this message]
2005-02-14 23:35 ` Rik van Riel
2005-02-14 14:30 ` [PATCH] 2/5: " Andreas Gruenbacher
2005-02-14 18:30 ` Kurt Garloff
2005-02-15 5:45 ` [PATCH] New " Kurt Garloff
2005-02-15 4:50 ` [PATCH] 0/5: " Chris Wright
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050214232757.GJ18744@tpkurt.garloff.de \
--to=garloff@suse.de \
--cc=agruen@suse.de \
--cc=chrisw@osdl.org \
--cc=jmorris@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®