From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7ECC2BA1D for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 00:45:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F1C208E4 for ; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 00:45:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726851AbfFGApd (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jun 2019 20:45:33 -0400 Received: from namei.org ([65.99.196.166]:37450 "EHLO namei.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726379AbfFGApd (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jun 2019 20:45:33 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by namei.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x570jK00022301; Fri, 7 Jun 2019 00:45:20 GMT Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 10:45:20 +1000 (AEST) From: James Morris To: Paul Moore cc: Casey Schaufler , Janne Karhunen , Stephen Smalley , Mimi Zohar , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] LSM: switch to blocking policy update notifiers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20190605083606.4209-1-janne.karhunen@gmail.com> <9121835b-d6ac-c9d5-349a-1ef7024c6192@schaufler-ca.com> <1edfbd72-f492-db17-8717-a8cfe30d9654@schaufler-ca.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Wed, 5 Jun 2019, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 1:05 PM Casey Schaufler wrote: > > On 6/5/2019 9:51 AM, Janne Karhunen wrote: > > > > One hook with an added "bool blocking" argument, if > > that's the only difference? > > I think there is value in keeping a similar convention to the notifier > code on which this is based, see include/linux/notifier.h. > Although this doesn't seem to be what other users in the kernel are doing. Probably the less code churn the better in this case. -- James Morris