On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:32 PM, Daniel Jurgens <dani...@mellanox.com> wrote: > On 6/30/2016 4:18 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Daniel Jurgens <dani...@mellanox.com> wrote: >>> On 6/30/2016 3:17 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Dan Jurgens <dani...@mellanox.com> wrote: >>>>> From: Daniel Jurgens <dani...@mellanox.com> >>>>> >>>>> Support for Infiniband requires the addition of two new object contexts, >>>>> one for infiniband PKeys and another IB End Ports. Added handlers to read >>>>> and write the new ocontext types when reading or writing a binary policy >>>>> representation. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Jurgens <dani...@mellanox.com> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Eli Cohen <e...@mellanox.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> security/selinux/include/security.h | 3 +- >>>>> security/selinux/ss/policydb.c | 129 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>>>> security/selinux/ss/policydb.h | 27 +++++--- >>>>> 3 files changed, 135 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
... } >>>>> + case OCON_IB_END_PORT: >>>> This is a little bit of bikeshedding, but is there such thing as an IB >>>> "port" that isn't an *end* "port"? Could we simply use OCON_IB_PORT? >>> Jason Gunthorpe requested that the name be end_port in the RFC series. >> His reasoning? Is there a IB port concept that isn't an end port? > The IB spec defines them as such. I had called them ib_devices previously > though so it's possible he would tolerate "port" instead. Okay, if that is what they are called that's fine with me. Perhaps just squash the macro to OCON_IB_ENDPORT or similar; all those underscores are messing with my mental parser. -- paul moore security @ redhat _______________________________________________ Selinux mailing list Selinux@tycho.nsa.gov To unsubscribe, send email to selinux-le...@tycho.nsa.gov. To get help, send an email containing "help" to selinux-requ...@tycho.nsa.gov.