On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 10:33:28PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Sep 29, 2004 at 09:14:20PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > it's not a severe performance penalty. > > > > especially when it's disabled by default with "selinux=0". > > Yes, all the indirect calls due to CONFIG_SECURITY are a performance > penalty. ... of about 2%.
sufficiently insignificant for both redhat _and_ suse to have started shipping, six months ago, kernels with selinux compiled in and disabled by default. l.
