linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 09/17] KEYS: Rename get_builtin_and_secondary

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8906F8A4-313F-45E5-8ABD-A1A2D07BFD93@oracle.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 Nov 2021 17:21:45 +0000
From:   Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
CC:     "keyrings@...r.kernel.org" <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "dhowells@...hat.com" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        "dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        "herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "serge@...lyn.com" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "weiyongjun1@...wei.com" <weiyongjun1@...wei.com>,
        "nayna@...ux.ibm.com" <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "ebiggers@...gle.com" <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
        "ardb@...nel.org" <ardb@...nel.org>,
        "nramas@...ux.microsoft.com" <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        "lszubowi@...hat.com" <lszubowi@...hat.com>,
        "jason@...c4.com" <jason@...c4.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        "James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com" 
        <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
        "pjones@...hat.com" <pjones@...hat.com>,
        Konrad Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 09/17] KEYS: Rename
 get_builtin_and_secondary_restriction



> On Nov 26, 2021, at 5:49 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2021-11-23 at 23:41 -0500, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>> In preparation for returning either the existing
>> restrict_link_by_builtin_and_secondary_trusted or the upcoming
>> restriction that includes the trusted builtin, secondary and
>> machine keys, to improve clarity, rename
>> get_builtin_and_secondary_restriction to get_secondary_restriction.
>> 
>> Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> v6: Initial version
>> v7: Unmodified from v7
>> v8: Code unmodified from v7, added Mimi's Reviewed-by
>> ---
>>  certs/system_keyring.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/certs/system_keyring.c b/certs/system_keyring.c
>> index 692365dee2bd..8f1f87579819 100644
>> --- a/certs/system_keyring.c
>> +++ b/certs/system_keyring.c
>> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ int restrict_link_by_builtin_and_secondary_trusted(
>>   * Allocate a struct key_restriction for the "builtin and secondary trust"
>>   * keyring. Only for use in system_trusted_keyring_init().
>>   */
>> -static __init struct key_restriction *get_builtin_and_secondary_restriction(void)
>> +static __init struct key_restriction *get_secondary_restriction(void)
>>  {
>>         struct key_restriction *restriction;
>>  
>> @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static __init int system_trusted_keyring_init(void)
>>                                KEY_USR_VIEW | KEY_USR_READ | KEY_USR_SEARCH |
>>                                KEY_USR_WRITE),
>>                               KEY_ALLOC_NOT_IN_QUOTA,
>> -                             get_builtin_and_secondary_restriction(),
>> +                             get_secondary_restriction(),
>>                               NULL);
>>         if (IS_ERR(secondary_trusted_keys))
>>                 panic("Can't allocate secondary trusted keyring\n");
> 
> This is wrong order.
> 
> You should first do the changes that make the old name
> obsolete and only after that have a patch that does the
> rename. Unfortunately, this patch cannot possibly acked
> with the current order.

I can change the order, but I'm confused how this would work for a git bisect. 
If the rename happens afterwards, now two patches will always need to be 
reverted instead of the possibility of one.  Is this your expectation?