Thread (21 messages) 21 messages, 9 authors, 2017-06-04

Re: [PATCH] LSM: Make security_hook_heads a local variable.

From: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: 2017-05-22 20:35:40
Also in: linux-security-module, lkml

On 5/22/2017 12:50 PM, Igor Stoppa wrote:
On 22/05/17 18:09, Casey Schaufler wrote:
quoted
On 5/22/2017 7:03 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
[...]
quoted
quoted
But even with those we can still chain
them together with a list with external linkage.
I gave up that approach in 2012. Too many unnecessary calls to
null functions, and massive function vectors with a tiny number
of non-null entries. From a data structure standpoint, it was
just wrong. The list scheme is exactly right for the task at
hand.
I understand this as a green light, for me to continue with the plan of
using LSM Hooks as example for making dynamically allocated data become
read-only, using also Tetsuo's patch (thanks, btw).
I still don't like the assumption that a structure of
N elements can be assumed to be the same as an array
of N elements. Putting on my hardening hat, however, I
like the smalloc() solution to keeping the hook lists
safe, so I am willing to swallow the objection to using
offsets to address the existing exposure.
Is that correct?

---
thanks, igor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help