| Message ID | 20220905143318.1592015-6-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | bpf: Add kfuncs for PKCS#7 signature verification | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 | success | Logs for llvm-toolchain |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 | success | Logs for set-matrix |
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply, async |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 | success | Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 | success | Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16 |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 | success | Logs for build for s390x with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 | success | Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 | fail | Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16 |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 | success | Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 | success | Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16 |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 | success | Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16 |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 | success | Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 | success | Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16 |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 | success | Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 | success | Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 | success | Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 | success | Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR | fail | PR summary |
| bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 | success | Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc |
On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > In preparation for the patch that introduces the bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to be able to > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum key_lookup_flag, so that > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are automatically > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs. > > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking whether a > variable contains only defined flags. > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org> > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> You should remove ack if there is any substantial change. > --- > include/linux/key.h | 6 ++++++ > security/keys/internal.h | 2 -- > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/key.h b/include/linux/key.h > index 7febc4881363..d84171f90cbd 100644 > --- a/include/linux/key.h > +++ b/include/linux/key.h > @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ enum key_need_perm { > KEY_DEFER_PERM_CHECK, /* Special: permission check is deferred */ > }; > > +enum key_lookup_flag { > + KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE = 0x01, /* Create special keyrings if they don't exist */ > + KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL = 0x02, /* Permit partially constructed keys to be found */ > + KEY_LOOKUP_ALL = (KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE | KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL), /* OR of previous flags */ Drop the comments (should be reviewed separately + out of context). > +}; > + > struct seq_file; > struct user_struct; > struct signal_struct; > diff --git a/security/keys/internal.h b/security/keys/internal.h > index 9b9cf3b6fcbb..3c1e7122076b 100644 > --- a/security/keys/internal.h > +++ b/security/keys/internal.h > @@ -165,8 +165,6 @@ extern struct key *request_key_and_link(struct key_type *type, > > extern bool lookup_user_key_possessed(const struct key *key, > const struct key_match_data *match_data); > -#define KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE 0x01 > -#define KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL 0x02 > > extern long join_session_keyring(const char *name); > extern void key_change_session_keyring(struct callback_head *twork); > -- > 2.25.1 > BR, Jarkko
On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 00:38 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > > In preparation for the patch that introduces the > > bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF > > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to be > > able to > > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum key_lookup_flag, so > > that > > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are > > automatically > > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs. > > > > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking > > whether a > > variable contains only defined flags. > > > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org> > > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> > > You should remove ack if there is any substantial change. Yes, sorry. I thought you were fine with the change due to: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YxF4H9MTDj+PnJ+V@kernel.org/ > > > --- > > include/linux/key.h | 6 ++++++ > > security/keys/internal.h | 2 -- > > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/key.h b/include/linux/key.h > > index 7febc4881363..d84171f90cbd 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/key.h > > +++ b/include/linux/key.h > > @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ enum key_need_perm { > > KEY_DEFER_PERM_CHECK, /* Special: permission check is > > deferred */ > > }; > > > > +enum key_lookup_flag { > > + KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE = 0x01, /* Create special keyrings if they > > don't exist */ > > + KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL = 0x02, /* Permit partially constructed > > keys to be found */ > > + KEY_LOOKUP_ALL = (KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE | KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL), /* > > OR of previous flags */ > > Drop the comments (should be reviewed separately + out of context). The same style is used for many definitions in include/linux/key.h No problem to remove them, please just let me know where they should be. Often, eBPF maintainers asked me to add a description to the code to explain how new definitions should be used. Thanks Roberto
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 09:08:23AM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 00:38 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > > > > In preparation for the patch that introduces the > > > bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF > > > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to be > > > able to > > > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum key_lookup_flag, so > > > that > > > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are > > > automatically > > > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs. > > > > > > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking > > > whether a > > > variable contains only defined flags. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org> > > > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> > > > > You should remove ack if there is any substantial change. > > Yes, sorry. I thought you were fine with the change due to: > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YxF4H9MTDj+PnJ+V@kernel.org/ It was the documentation part, not really the enum change. BR, Jarkko
On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 13:37 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 09:08:23AM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 00:38 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > > > > > > In preparation for the patch that introduces the > > > > bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF > > > > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to > > > > be > > > > able to > > > > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum > > > > key_lookup_flag, so > > > > that > > > > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are > > > > automatically > > > > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs. > > > > > > > > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking > > > > whether a > > > > variable contains only defined flags. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org> > > > > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> > > > > > > You should remove ack if there is any substantial change. > > > > Yes, sorry. I thought you were fine with the change due to: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YxF4H9MTDj+PnJ+V@kernel.org/ > > It was the documentation part, not really the enum change. > Ok, so if I remove the documentation I can keep your ack? Thanks Roberto
On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 01:04:35PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 13:37 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 09:08:23AM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > > On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 00:38 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > > > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > > > > > > > > In preparation for the patch that introduces the > > > > > bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF > > > > > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to > > > > > be > > > > > able to > > > > > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum > > > > > key_lookup_flag, so > > > > > that > > > > > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are > > > > > automatically > > > > > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs. > > > > > > > > > > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking > > > > > whether a > > > > > variable contains only defined flags. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com> > > > > > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org> > > > > > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> > > > > > > > > You should remove ack if there is any substantial change. > > > > > > Yes, sorry. I thought you were fine with the change due to: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YxF4H9MTDj+PnJ+V@kernel.org/ > > > > It was the documentation part, not really the enum change. > > > > Ok, so if I remove the documentation I can keep your ack? Can you show the updated patch (e.g. via using attachment)? BR, Jarkko
diff --git a/include/linux/key.h b/include/linux/key.h index 7febc4881363..d84171f90cbd 100644 --- a/include/linux/key.h +++ b/include/linux/key.h @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ enum key_need_perm { KEY_DEFER_PERM_CHECK, /* Special: permission check is deferred */ }; +enum key_lookup_flag { + KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE = 0x01, /* Create special keyrings if they don't exist */ + KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL = 0x02, /* Permit partially constructed keys to be found */ + KEY_LOOKUP_ALL = (KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE | KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL), /* OR of previous flags */ +}; + struct seq_file; struct user_struct; struct signal_struct; diff --git a/security/keys/internal.h b/security/keys/internal.h index 9b9cf3b6fcbb..3c1e7122076b 100644 --- a/security/keys/internal.h +++ b/security/keys/internal.h @@ -165,8 +165,6 @@ extern struct key *request_key_and_link(struct key_type *type, extern bool lookup_user_key_possessed(const struct key *key, const struct key_match_data *match_data); -#define KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE 0x01 -#define KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL 0x02 extern long join_session_keyring(const char *name); extern void key_change_session_keyring(struct callback_head *twork);