From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964847AbVHYFcZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:32:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964848AbVHYFcY (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:32:24 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:58077 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964847AbVHYFcX (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2005 01:32:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 22:32:08 -0700 From: Chris Wright To: James Morris Cc: Chris Wright , linux-security-module@wirex.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kurt Garloff , Stephen Smalley Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] LSM hook updates Message-ID: <20050825053208.GS7762@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20050825012028.720597000@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * James Morris (jmorris@namei.org) wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Chris Wright wrote: > > > This is based on Kurt's original work. The net effect is that > > LSM hooks are called conditionally, and in all cases capabilities > > provide the defaults. I've done some basic performance testing, and > > found nothing surprising. > > Do you mean nothing noticable? I did only microbenchmarking, which was as much as double digit percentage faster (on P4), nothing was slower. > > I'm interested to see numbers from others > > before I push this up. These are against Linus' current git tree (they > > will clash with the -mm tree). > > Are there any numbers for popular architectures like i386 and x86_64? I'll have some numbers tomorrow. If you'd like to run SELinux that'd be quite useful. thanks, -chris