Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 16:52:20 -0700 From: John-Mark Gurney <gurney_j@efn.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Breaking out kern_mac.c into multiple files Message-ID: <20030730235220.GH10708@funkthat.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030730164805.89045P-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030730164805.89045P-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Robert Watson wrote this message on Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 16:50 -0400:
> As the scope of the MAC Framework has grown, so has kern_mac.c. It's
> reached the point where breaking it into separate files would make it a
> lot easier to read, by virtue of logically grouping its exposed functions,
> APIs, etc. Similarly scoped extension frameworks, such as NetGraph and
> GEOM, have opted to go into sys/$framework, with files named similarly.
> My leaning was to do something similar -- add sys/mac, and then have
> mac_framework.c, mac_net.c, mac_sysvipc.c, etc. I probably won't get to
> this for a bit because I want to avoid introducing large numbers of
> conflicts for our outstanding changes, but I was going to poll for general
> interest in placement, naming, etc. Some of the other choices would be to
> keep it in kern/, but rename (similar to the System V IPC bits, VFS bits,
> et al).
Can the MAC framework be loaded as a module? If so, then
sys/(security/)?/mac is my vote. If it's going to be an intregal part
of the system that will be standard, then kern/ is open.
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030730235220.GH10708>