[RFC PATCH 07/29] lsm: rework lsm_active_cnt and lsm_idlist[]

[Paul Moore]

On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 7:06 PM Kees Cook <kees at kernel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 02:49:52PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:

...

> > diff --git a/security/lsm_init.c b/security/lsm_init.c
> > index edf2f4140eaa..981ddb20f48e 100644
> > --- a/security/lsm_init.c
> > +++ b/security/lsm_init.c
> > @@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ static __initdata const char *lsm_order_cmdline;
> >  static __initdata const char *lsm_order_legacy;
> >
> >  /* Ordered list of LSMs to initialize. */
> > -static __initdata struct lsm_info *lsm_order[MAX_LSM_COUNT + 1];
> >  static __initdata struct lsm_info *lsm_exclusive;
> > +static __initdata struct lsm_info *lsm_order[MAX_LSM_COUNT + 1];
>
> I don't care either way, but why re-order these? Just local reverse
> xmas-tree?

Sure?

Honestly can't say for certain, at this point in the development
process I had somewhat resigned myself to having a mess of a patchset
so I figured this was an opportunity to make it look "nice" (er?) in
my mind, and I suppose at that point that looked better to me ... ?

-- 
paul-moore.com