linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc: Fix fs_context_parse_param description in mount

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]

Date:   Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:35:20 +0100
From:   Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
To:     Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc:     corbet@....net, casey@...aufler-ca.com, omosnace@...hat.com,
        john.johansen@...onical.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc: Fix fs_context_parse_param description in
 mount_api.rst

On Fri, 2022-12-09 at 12:41 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2022 at 3:30 AM Roberto Sassu
> <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > 
> > Align with the description of fs_context_parse_param in lsm_hooks.h, which
> > seems the right one according to the code.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/filesystems/mount_api.rst | 9 ++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> I'm going to leave this patch as a "hold" for right now.  The existing
> text is arguably not great, but I'm not really in love with the
> replacement text taken from the LSM hook comments; given the merge
> window opens in a couple of days, we don't have much time to fiddle
> with the wording so let's just hold this for a little bit.
> 
> These comment corrections (which are very welcome!) have also reminded
> me that we really should move the hook comment blocks out of the
> header file and into security.c like every other kernel function.
> This should help increase their discoverability while also making it
> easier to maintain the comments over time.  I'm going to post a first
> pass at this as soon as the merge window closes, and once that is done
> we can do further work to cleanup the descriptions and add more detail
> (including notes both for the other kernel subsystems that call the
> hooks and the LSM devs who provide implementations).

Ok, great!

Roberto