Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] security: ima: call ima_init() again at late_initcall_sync for defered TPM

On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 2:13 PM Yeoreum Yun <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Sounds good. Once the patch is posted, I’ll review it as well.
> Sorry again for the noise, and thanks for your patience ;)

My apologies for not getting a chance to look at this patchset sooner.

This seems like an obvious, perhaps even stupid, question, but I have
to ask: if IMA can be properly initialized via late_initcall_sync(),
why not simply do the initialization in late_initcall_sync() and drop
the late_initcall() initialization?

Does any IMA functionality suffer if initialization waits until
late_initcall_sync()?  If so, it seems non-critical if waiting until
_sync() is acceptable, as it appears in these patches/comments.

--
paul-moore.com