[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250602-hagel-poliklinisch-922154e2202d@brauner>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2025 11:32:30 +0200
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com, andrii@...nel.org, eddyz87@...il.com,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, martin.lau@...ux.dev, kpsingh@...nel.org,
mattbobrowski@...gle.com, amir73il@...il.com, repnop@...gle.com, jlayton@...nel.org,
josef@...icpanda.com, gnoack@...gle.com, Tingmao Wang <m@...wtm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: Introduce path iterator
On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 07:43:48PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 02:20:39PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>
> > Without access to mount_lock, what would be the best way to fix this
> > Landlock issue while making it backportable?
> >
> > >
> > > If we update path_parent in this patchset with choose_mountpoint(),
> > > and use it in Landlock, we will close this race condition, right?
> >
> > choose_mountpoint() is currently private, but if we add a new filesystem
> > helper, I think the right approach would be to expose follow_dotdot(),
> > updating its arguments with public types. This way the intermediates
> > mount points will not be exposed, RCU optimization will be leveraged,
> > and usage of this new helper will be simplified.
>
> IMO anything that involves struct nameidata should remain inside
> fs/namei.c - something public might share helpers with it, but that's
Strongly agree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists