linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add is_kernel parameter to LSM/bpf test programs

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]

Message-ID: <CAPhsuW7sc_gYP=U0j41GgQGuF1Qj4ontKDiib64qB0COq84huA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 09:20:27 -0800
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, Blaise Boscaccy <bboscaccy@...ux.microsoft.com>, 
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, 
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, 
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>, Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@...hat.com>, 
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, selinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add is_kernel parameter to
 LSM/bpf test programs

On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 9:08 AM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
[...]
> My preference is to go via bpf-next, since changes are bigger
> on bpf side than on lsm side.
>
> Re: selftest.
>
> Why change them at all if 'bool kernel' attribute is unused ?
> Addition of the attr should be backward compatible change,
> so all tests should still pass as-is.

I was thinking of keeping the argument list in the selftests up
to date, so that the users can use selftests as examples when
writing their BPF programs.

OTOH, with the "bool kernel" at the end of the argument list,
it is backward compatible.

> You probably should add a new test where 'kernel' arg is actually
> used for something. That would be patch 2.

+1. This is a great idea.

Thanks,
Song