From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261603AbVGaDxo (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jul 2005 23:53:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261605AbVGaDxo (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jul 2005 23:53:44 -0400 Received: from ms-smtp-01.texas.rr.com ([24.93.47.40]:47494 "EHLO ms-smtp-01-eri0.texas.rr.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261603AbVGaDxn (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jul 2005 23:53:43 -0400 Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:53:21 -0500 From: serge@hallyn.com To: Tony Jones Cc: serue@us.ibm.com, lkml , Chris Wright , Stephen Smalley , James Morris , Andrew Morton , Michael Halcrow , steve@immunix.com Subject: Re: [patch 0/15] lsm stacking v0.3: intro Message-ID: <20050731035321.GA17154@vino.hallyn.com> References: <20050727181732.GA22483@serge.austin.ibm.com> <20050730050701.GA22901@immunix.com> <20050730190222.GA12473@vino.hallyn.com> <20050730201852.GA8223@immunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050730201852.GA8223@immunix.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Quoting Tony Jones (tonyj@suse.de): > > Yes, after I added the unlink function, it started to seem that the > > special cases for !CONFIG_SECURITY_STACKER wouldn't be any faster than > > the stacker versions. They still might be, but I'll have to think about > > it. If I just ditch those, then I can probably ditch the whole > > Esp since James' suggestion would impact it. I'd imagine you would always want > array[0] for this case, no? Actually I don't think that's even needed - I just wasn't thinking right while addressing another bug. thanks, -serge