From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: steve@steve.fi (Steve Kemp) Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 17:21:24 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v2] Moved module init-functions into the module. In-Reply-To: References: <20170622084507.GA4025@steve.org.uk> <589cbc78-2256-2334-e907-2e440f99b612@schaufler-ca.com> Message-ID: <1498152084.15628.1@ssh.steve.org.uk> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org > > The module initialization code belongs in the module. > > The LSM infrastructure should have an absolute minimum > > of module specific information. I would rather see the > > "minor" modules (yama, loadpin) changed to use the module > > registration scheme used by the "major" modules, but that > > will require a mechanism to ensure module ordering, and > > we don't have that yet. No, don't do this. > > Yeah, I agree: initialization order is important here and I don't want > to depend on the Makefile for this. I can appreciate that argument. I did consider it myself, but decided that because the minor modules had such differing goals, and no real functional overlap, in practice that would mean that explicit ordering wasn't a strong requirement. If/when a better registration scheme becomes available then we'll all switch to using it, and that would be great. Thanks for the feedback. I'll not tweak any further. Steve -- https://steve.fi/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html