Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:11:42 -0800 | From | Casey Schaufler <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v12 0/9] LSM: Multiple concurrent LSMs |
| |
On 1/7/2013 7:59 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Casey, > > On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 14:01:59 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote: >> Let me ask Andrew's question: Why do you want to do this (what is the >> use case)? What does this gain us? >> >> Also, you should use unique subjects for each of the patches in the >> series. > You probably also want to think a bit harder about the order of the > patches - you should introduce new APIs before you use them and remove > calls to functions before you remove the functions. > The unfortunate reality is that I couldn't find a good way to stage the changes. It's a wonking big set of infrastructure change. I could introduce the security blob abstraction separately but that is a fraction of the change. If it would have gone through mail filters as a single patch I'd have sent it that way.
I can spend time on patch presentation, and will if necessary. As it is, I can start getting substantive commentary from beyond the LSM crowd, who have already been extremely cooperative and often critical.
| |