Re: [PATCH] 5/5: LSM hooks rework

2005-02-14 Thread Kurt Garloff
Hi James, On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:50:01AM -0500, James Morris wrote: > On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Kurt Garloff wrote: > > > /* Condition for invocation of non-default security_op */ > > #define COND_SECURITY(seop, def) \ > > - (likely(security_ops == _security_ops))? def: > >

Re: [PATCH] 5/5: LSM hooks rework

2005-02-14 Thread James Morris
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Kurt Garloff wrote: > /* Condition for invocation of non-default security_op */ > #define COND_SECURITY(seop, def) \ > - (likely(security_ops == _security_ops))? def: > security_ops->seop > + (unlikely(security_enabled))? security_ops->seop: def So this will

Re: [PATCH] 5/5: LSM hooks rework

2005-02-14 Thread James Morris
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Kurt Garloff wrote: /* Condition for invocation of non-default security_op */ #define COND_SECURITY(seop, def) \ - (likely(security_ops == capability_security_ops))? def: security_ops-seop + (unlikely(security_enabled))? security_ops-seop: def So this

Re: [PATCH] 5/5: LSM hooks rework

2005-02-14 Thread Kurt Garloff
Hi James, On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 11:50:01AM -0500, James Morris wrote: On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Kurt Garloff wrote: /* Condition for invocation of non-default security_op */ #define COND_SECURITY(seop, def) \ - (likely(security_ops == capability_security_ops))? def: