Re: [RFC][PATCH] collect security labels on user processes generating audit messages

On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 11:17 -0500, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 09:49 -0600, Timothy R. Chavez wrote: > > This makes sense to me. I'll go ahead and make the change. I wouldn't > > even technically need the function or function call in my patch since > > selinux_available() simply returns ss_initialized. > > Well, I think we want to keep that variable private to the SELinux > "module". In the future, we'll likely add proper namespace prefixes to > all non-static SELinux symbols to avoid polluting the kernel namespace. > I think maybe I miscommunicated my intentions. If I move the check to determine whether or not SELinux is enabled into selinux_id_to_ctx(), then I can simply use ss_initialized directly rather then calling selinux_available(), as I'll be making the check within the SELinux "module" (selinux/exports.c).