[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJfpeguctirEYECoigcAsJwpGPCX2NyfMZ8H8GHGW-0UyKfjgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 10:09:05 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
zohar@...ux.ibm.com, roberto.sassu@...wei.com,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] ima: Fix detection of read/write violations on stacked filesystems
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 at 21:09, Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> I was hoping that this would be sufficiently generic to work with
> potential future stacked filesystems as well that would need to also
> provide support for D_REAL_FILEDATA.
I also have very bad feelings from IMA digging in the internals of overlayfs.
We should strive to get rid of remaining d_real() instances, not add more.
On a related note, D_REAL_METADATA was apparently added for IMA
(commit 11b3f8ae7081 ("fs: remove the inode argument to ->d_real()
method")), but there's no current user. What's up with this?
Thanks,
Miklos
,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists