From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/9] SELinux support for Infiniband RDMA Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:17:03 -0600 Message-ID: <20160926181703.GB28992@obsidianresearch.com> References: <20160830184633.GE7586@obsidianresearch.com> <20160830185548.GA9768@obsidianresearch.com> <20160901163418.GA6479@obsidianresearch.com> <20160906200221.GE28416@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Moore Cc: Daniel Jurgens , Leon Romanovsky , "chrisw@sous-sol.org" , Stephen Smalley , Eric Paris , "dledford@redhat.com" , "sean.hefty@intel.com" , "hal.rosenstock@gmail.com" , "selinux@tycho.nsa.gov" , "linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" , Yevgeny Petrilin List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:43:34PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > So far the discussion has been around providing access controls at the > transport layer, are there any RDMA entities that are transport > agnostic that might be better suited for what we are trying to do? Or > is it simply that the RDMA layer is tied so tightly to the underlying > transport that we can't separate the two and have to consider them as > one? The generic RDMA layer is called 'rdmacm' and it is the layer Mellanox's already applied patches for RDMA namespace enablement worked at. Jason