On Wed Jun 16 2010 at 04:13:54 -0700, Paul Goyette wrote:
With the current ways of secmodel register, I'd be damn careful to not
push it around. The effect is that if it's called 0 times, you have a
system which allows everything. So if your suggestion is implemented
and you're testing a new secmodel which buggily omits register alongside
another correctly registering secmodel, things will appear to work fine,
But if in some scenario the buggy one is loaded alone, well ... welcome
to the wishing well.
I had some concern about this as well, wondering if I would be able to
be sure I'd found all the secmodel modules that might exist.
Especially ones which aren't in src!
Perhaps it would be best to retain MODULE_CLASS_SECMODEL and also add
the suggested MODULE_CLASS_EARLY?
That would be my vote.
But, "early" is a little vague. What if in the future we want
modules which are initialized even earlier. Will those be called
MODULE_CLASS_EARLIER_THAN_EARLY? If the class means "intialized before
autoconf", why not use that in the name?