[RFC PATCH] lsm,selinux: pass the family information along with xfrm flow

[James Morris]

On Tue, 27 Oct 2020, Paul Moore wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 9:44 AM Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 7:09 PM James Morris <jmorris at namei.org> wrote:
> > > I'm not keen on adding a parameter which nobody is using. Perhaps a note
> > > in the header instead?
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 6:14 AM Herbert Xu <herbert at gondor.apana.org.au> wrote:
> > > Please at least change to the struct flowi to flowi_common if we're
> > > not adding a family field.
> >
> > It did feel a bit weird adding a (currently) unused parameter, so I
> > can understand the concern, I just worry that a comment in the code
> > will be easily overlooked.  I also thought about passing a pointer to
> > the nested flowi_common struct, but it doesn't appear that this is
> > done anywhere else in the stack so it felt wrong to do it here.
> 
> With the merge window behind us, where do stand on this?  I see the
> ACK from Casey and some grumbling about adding an unused parameter
> (which is a valid argument, I just feel the alternative is worse), but
> I haven't seen any serious NACKs.
> 
> Any objections or other strong feelings to me merging this via the
> selinux/next branch?

Yes, we should not add unused parameters to functions.

-- 
James Morris
<jmorris at namei.org>