Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 13 Oct 2007 12:26:13 -0700 (PDT) | From | Casey Schaufler <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Version 6 (2.6.23) Smack: Simplified Mandatory Access Control Kernel |
| |
--- Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 10:01:17PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > > What do you need smk_sb for? Looks like dead weight...
Reminant of an abandoned thought process. Cleaning.
> smk_read_load(): obvious seq_file candidate. > smk_read_cipso(): ditto. > > What protects smk_cipso_written? BTW, its use on the read side is an > atrocity... > > smk_write_doi() - WTF would NUL-terminate temp[]? You run sscanf on > it... > smk_write_direct() - ditto > smk_write_ambient() - ditto > smk_read_ambient() - who said that you won't get write between strlen() > and simple_read_from_buffer()?
Eek. The smackfs code does look pretty crufty in the context of seq_file, doesn't it? I will have a go at cleaning that up some.
> smk_import_entry(): > > + for (skp = smack_known; skp != NULL; skp = skp->smk_next) > > + if (skp->smk_known == smack) > > + break; > Really? With smack[] being an auto array?
Nope. What you see there is a flaw, a mistake, a bug. And a serious memory use problem, too. Fix in test. Thank you.
> That's from quick look through the read/write in there; I hadn't really > looked into parsers or deeper into the guts.
Your suggestions regarding seq_file look helpful. Thank you.
Casey Schaufler casey@schaufler-ca.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |