[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y4n0RWqSwDHVT+HA@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 13:49:09 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Allen Webb <allenwebb@...gle.com>
Cc: "linux-modules@...r.kernel.org" <linux-modules@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/1] modules: add modalias file to sysfs for modules.
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 03:16:30PM -0600, Allen Webb wrote:
> USB devices support the authorized attribute which can be used by
You don't mention USB in the subject line?
> user-space to implement trust-based systems for enabling USB devices. It
> would be helpful when building these systems to be able to know in
> advance which kernel drivers (or modules) are reachable from a
> particular USB device.
>
> This information is readily available for external modules in
> modules.alias. However, builtin kernel modules are not covered. This
> patch adds a sys-fs attribute to both builtin and loaded modules
"sysfs" No "-", that only goes in my last name :)
And as you added sysfs files, you have to also have Documentation/ABI/
entries that describe the new files. Without that, this patch can't
even be considered for review :(
And maybe this should be a patch series and not just 1 patch? Remember
a patch can only do "one logical thing", and you seem to be doing a lot
of different things in this single patch.
Would you be able to review this patch as-is if you were in our shoes?
Remember we deal with thousands of patches each week.
> exposing the matching rules in the modalias format for integration
> with tools like USBGuard.
>
> Note that as written CONFIG_MODULES must be enabled.
What happens if CONFIG_MODULES is not enabled? And why should that
matter?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists