[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y35C9O27J29bUDjA@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2022 16:57:40 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Nayna <nayna@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, npiggin@...il.com,
christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, Dov Murik <dovmurik@...ux.ibm.com>,
George Wilson <gcwilson@...ux.ibm.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Russell Currey <ruscur@...sell.cc>,
Andrew Donnellan <ajd@...ux.ibm.com>,
Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
"Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" <ritesh.list@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: define a firmware security filesystem named
fwsecurityfs
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:05:49AM -0500, Nayna wrote:
>
> On 11/22/22 18:21, Nayna wrote:
> >
> > From the perspective of our use case, we need to expose firmware
> > security objects to userspace for management. Not all of the objects
> > pre-exist and we would like to allow root to create them from userspace.
> >
> > From a unification perspective, I have considered a common location at
> > /sys/firmware/security for managing any platform's security objects. And
> > I've proposed a generic filesystem, which could be used by any platform
> > to represent firmware security objects via /sys/firmware/security.
> >
> > Here are some alternatives to generic filesystem in discussion:
> >
> > 1. Start with a platform-specific filesystem. If more platforms would
> > like to use the approach, it can be made generic. We would still have a
> > common location of /sys/firmware/security and new code would live in
> > arch. This is my preference and would be the best fit for our use case.
> >
> > 2. Use securityfs. This would mean modifying it to satisfy other use
> > cases, including supporting userspace file creation. I don't know if the
> > securityfs maintainer would find that acceptable. I would also still
> > want some way to expose variables at /sys/firmware/security.
> >
> > 3. Use a sysfs-based approach. This would be a platform-specific
> > implementation. However, sysfs has a similar issue to securityfs for
> > file creation. When I tried it in RFC v1[1], I had to implement a
> > workaround to achieve that.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20220122005637.28199-3-nayna@linux.ibm.com/
> >
> Hi Greg,
>
> Based on the discussions so far, is Option 1, described above, an acceptable
> next step?
No, as I said almost a year ago, I do not want to see platform-only
filesystems going and implementing stuff that should be shared by all
platforms.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists