[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <394ed3b5f96afd3cf39e99675be1a32c89c8080d.camel@huaweicloud.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2022 09:08:23 +0200
From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, yhs@...com,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, mykolal@...com,
dhowells@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com,
paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
shuah@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
deso@...teo.net, memxor@...il.com,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 05/12] KEYS: Move KEY_LOOKUP_ to include/linux/key.h
and define KEY_LOOKUP_ALL
On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 00:38 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> >
> > In preparation for the patch that introduces the
> > bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF
> > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to be
> > able to
> > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum key_lookup_flag, so
> > that
> > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are
> > automatically
> > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs.
> >
> > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking
> > whether a
> > variable contains only defined flags.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>
> > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
>
> You should remove ack if there is any substantial change.
Yes, sorry. I thought you were fine with the change due to:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YxF4H9MTDj+PnJ+V@kernel.org/
>
> > ---
> > include/linux/key.h | 6 ++++++
> > security/keys/internal.h | 2 --
> > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/key.h b/include/linux/key.h
> > index 7febc4881363..d84171f90cbd 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/key.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/key.h
> > @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ enum key_need_perm {
> > KEY_DEFER_PERM_CHECK, /* Special: permission check is
> > deferred */
> > };
> >
> > +enum key_lookup_flag {
> > + KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE = 0x01, /* Create special keyrings if they
> > don't exist */
> > + KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL = 0x02, /* Permit partially constructed
> > keys to be found */
> > + KEY_LOOKUP_ALL = (KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE | KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL), /*
> > OR of previous flags */
>
> Drop the comments (should be reviewed separately + out of context).
The same style is used for many definitions in include/linux/key.h
No problem to remove them, please just let me know where they should
be. Often, eBPF maintainers asked me to add a description to the code
to explain how new definitions should be used.
Thanks
Roberto
Powered by blists - more mailing lists