From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Morris Subject: Re: [patch 09/14] security: dont pass nameidata to security_inode_permission() Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 08:52:22 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: References: <20080521171458.077908538@szeredi.hu> <20080521171554.050962936@szeredi.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Smalley , Eric Paris , Casey Schaufler To: Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Received: from namei.org ([69.55.235.186]:40239 "EHLO us.intercode.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757601AbYEUWxS (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 18:53:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080521171554.050962936@szeredi.hu> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 21 May 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Miklos Szeredi > > Only pass nameidata->flags instead of the nameidata to > security_inode_permission(), synchronizing it with i_op->permission(). > > Currently no security module uses the nameidata parameter. > > The other change in ->permission() is that a dentry is passed instead > of an inode. Leave this till AppArmor integration, since that will > need a struct path instead of an inode. > > Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi > CC: James Morris > CC: Stephen Smalley > CC: Eric Paris > CC: Casey Schaufler Acked-by: James Morris -- James Morris