Re: [PATCH 2/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM)

Mimi Zohar
2008-10-31T19:35:34Z

On Fri, 2008-10-31 at 09:40 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 13:17 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Concern was raised on the lkml mailing list, about adding i_integrity
> > to the inode structure. This patch adds a comment clarifying that
> > i_integrity is only included in the inode if INTEGRITY is configured.
>
> Mimi, it is nice that you made this a config option. That definitely
> helps the embedded folks and those compiling their own kernels. But, it
> doesn't really help those who run distros.
>
> The distributions basically ship one kernel for everybody, and it has to
> have CONFIG_KITCHEN_SINK=y in order to support everyone's individual
> users. Although you provided a config option, in practice, this always
> bloats distro kernels which are the vast majority of users.

Thank you for giving a more fuller explanation as to why extending the
inode is such an issue.

> Is this even useful for filesystems like proc or sysfs? Should we bloat
> those inodes for a feature which might not possibly apply there?

Currently, we're not measuring proc or sysfs files.

Mimi