[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=winAVoX=u+uX1Cdf0ekmFHETumRr60rvC_z6jbno0ApPg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 12:22:10 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] lsm/lsm-pr-20240105
On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 at 11:54, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for pulling the changes, I'm sorry the syscall table entries
> for the LSM syscalls were not how you want to see them, but I'm more
> than a little confused as to what exactly we did wrong here.
Look at commit 5f42375904b0 ("LSM: wireup Linux Security Module
syscalls") and notice for example this:
--- a/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
+++ b/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
@@ -378,6 +378,9 @@
454 common futex_wake sys_futex_wake
455 common futex_wait sys_futex_wait
456 common futex_requeue sys_futex_requeue
+457 common lsm_get_self_attr sys_lsm_get_self_attr
+458 common lsm_set_self_attr sys_lsm_set_self_attr
+459 common lsm_list_modules sys_lsm_list_modules
Ok, fine - you added your new system calls to the end of the table.
Sure, I ended up having to fix them up because the "end of the table"
was different by the time I merged your tree, but that wasn't the
problem.
The problem is here - in the same commit:
--- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
+++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl
@@ -375,6 +375,9 @@
451 common cachestat sys_cachestat
452 common fchmodat2 sys_fchmodat2
453 64 map_shadow_stack sys_map_shadow_stack
+454 common lsm_get_self_attr sys_lsm_get_self_attr
+455 common lsm_set_self_attr sys_lsm_set_self_attr
+456 common lsm_list_modules sys_lsm_list_modules
note how you updated the tools copy WITH THE WRONG NUMBERS!
You just added them at the end of the table again, and just
incremented the numbers, but that was complete nonsense, because the
numbers didn't actually match the real system call numbers, because
that tools table hadn't been updated for new system calls - because it
hadn't needed them.
Yeah, our tooling header duplication is annoying, but the old
situation where the tooling just used various kernel headers directly
and would randomly break when kernel changes were made was even worse.
End result: avoid touching the tooling headers - and if you have to,
you need to *think* about it.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists