Re: [PATCH v20 12/20] dm verity: expose root hash digest and signature data to LSMs

Paul Moore
2024-08-18T17:23:00Z

On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 3:11 PM Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> On 8/16/2024 6:35 AM, Mikulas Patocka wrote:

...

> >>>>
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
> >>>> + u8 *root_digest_sig; /* signature of the root digest */
> >>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_SECURITY */
> >>>> unsigned int salt_size;
> >>>> sector_t data_start; /* data offset in 512-byte sectors */
> >>>> sector_t hash_start; /* hash start in blocks */
> >>>> @@ -58,6 +61,9 @@ struct dm_verity {
> >>>> bool hash_failed:1; /* set if hash of any block failed */
> >>>> bool use_bh_wq:1; /* try to verify in BH wq before normal work-queue */
> >>>> unsigned int digest_size; /* digest size for the current hash algorithm */
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
> >>>> + unsigned int sig_size; /* root digest signature size */
> >>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_SECURITY */
> >>>> unsigned int hash_reqsize; /* the size of temporary space for crypto */
> >>>> enum verity_mode mode; /* mode for handling verification errors */
> >>>> unsigned int corrupted_errs;/* Number of errors for corrupted blocks */
> >
> > Just nit-picking: I would move "unsigned int sig_size" up, after "u8
> > *root_digest_sig" entry.
> >
> > Mikulas
>
> Sure, I can make these two fields together.

Fan, do you want me to move the @sig_size field when merging or are
you planning to submit another revision? I'm happy to do it during
the merge, but I don't want to bother if you are going to post another
patchset.

--
paul-moore.com