From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753634AbYJ1Jd0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:33:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752002AbYJ1JdS (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:33:18 -0400 Received: from burp.tkv.asdf.org ([212.16.99.49]:59317 "EHLO cs181073102.pp.htv.fi" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751622AbYJ1JdS (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:33:18 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Silly questions: how can those security_ops->foo(...) calls work when entries seem to be NULL? References: From: Markku Savela Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:33:15 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Markku Savela's message of "Tue\, 28 Oct 2008 10\:20\:12 +0100") Message-ID: <87ej21njxg.fsf@burp.tkv.asdf.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Blah.. insert foot in mouth -- found: verify() calls security_fixups(), which modifies the supplied table.. IMHO, misleading name for function, "verify" sort of gives impression of non-modifying function, and thus got me fooled while reading it.. Sorry about bothering... -- Markku Savela