[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <CVG13KLCIT1X.1MQT6HYAYFRAU@suppilovahvero>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 13:50:18 +0300
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Casey Schaufler" <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
"Roberto Sassu" <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>,
<viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, <brauner@...nel.org>,
<chuck.lever@...cle.com>, <jlayton@...nel.org>, <neilb@...e.de>,
<kolga@...app.com>, <Dai.Ngo@...cle.com>, <tom@...pey.com>,
<zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
<paul@...l-moore.com>, <jmorris@...ei.org>, <serge@...lyn.com>,
<dhowells@...hat.com>, <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
<eparis@...isplace.org>
Cc: <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
<keyrings@...r.kernel.org>, <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
"Roberto Sassu" <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
"Stefan Berger" <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/25] security: Align inode_setattr hook definition
with EVM
On Tue Sep 5, 2023 at 6:56 PM EEST, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> On 9/4/2023 2:08 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Thu Aug 31, 2023 at 1:41 PM EEST, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> >> From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> >>
> >> Add the idmap parameter to the definition, so that evm_inode_setattr() can
> >> be registered as this hook implementation.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
> >> Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
> >> ---
> >> include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h | 3 ++-
> >> security/security.c | 2 +-
> >> security/selinux/hooks.c | 3 ++-
> >> security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 4 +++-
> >> 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h b/include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h
> >> index 4bdddb52a8fe..fdf075a6b1bb 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h
> >> @@ -134,7 +134,8 @@ LSM_HOOK(int, 0, inode_readlink, struct dentry *dentry)
> >> LSM_HOOK(int, 0, inode_follow_link, struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode,
> >> bool rcu)
> >> LSM_HOOK(int, 0, inode_permission, struct inode *inode, int mask)
> >> -LSM_HOOK(int, 0, inode_setattr, struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *attr)
> >> +LSM_HOOK(int, 0, inode_setattr, struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct dentry *dentry,
> >> + struct iattr *attr)
> > LSM_HOOK(int, 0, inode_setattr, struct mnt_idmap *idmap, struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *attr)
> >
> > Only 99 characters, i.e. breaking into two lines is not necessary.
>
> We're keeping the LSM code in the ancient 80 character format.
> Until we get some fresh, young maintainers involved who can convince
> us that line wrapped 80 character terminals are kewl we're sticking
> with what we know.
>
> https://lwn.net/Articles/822168/
Pretty artificial counter-example tbh :-) Even with Rust people tend to
stick one character variable names for trivial integer indices.
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists