Bug#249510: acknowledged by developer (selinux in debian kernel)
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.
Reply to: