From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
paul@paul-moore.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, song@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org, renauld@google.com,
Kui-Feng Lee <sinquersw@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] security: Count the LSMs enabled at compile time
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2023 08:50:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202309220848.010A198E7@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230922145505.4044003-3-kpsingh@kernel.org>
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 04:55:02PM +0200, KP Singh wrote:
> These macros are a clever trick to determine a count of the number of
> LSMs that are enabled in the config to ascertain the maximum number of
> static calls that need to be configured per LSM hook.
>
> Without this one would need to generate static calls for the total
> number of LSMs in the kernel (even if they are not compiled) times the
> number of LSM hooks which ends up being quite wasteful.
>
> Suggested-by: Kui-Feng Lee <sinquersw@gmail.com>
> Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> Acked-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
Thought below, but regardless of result:
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> ---
> include/linux/lsm_count.h | 107 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 107 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/lsm_count.h
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/lsm_count.h b/include/linux/lsm_count.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..4d6dac6efb75
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/lsm_count.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +
> +/*
> + * Copyright (C) 2023 Google LLC.
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef __LINUX_LSM_COUNT_H
> +#define __LINUX_LSM_COUNT_H
> +
> +#include <linux/args.h>
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
> +
> +/*
> + * Macros to count the number of LSMs enabled in the kernel at compile time.
> + */
> +
> +/*
> + * Capabilities is enabled when CONFIG_SECURITY is enabled.
> + */
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY)
> +#define CAPABILITIES_ENABLED 1,
> +#else
> +#define CAPABILITIES_ENABLED
> +#endif
We're in an #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY, so CAPABILITIES_ENABLED will always
be set. As such, we could leave off the trailing comma and list it
_last_ in the macro, and then ...
> +/*
> + * There is a trailing comma that we need to be accounted for. This is done by
> + * using a skipped argument in __COUNT_LSMS
> + */
> +#define __COUNT_LSMS(skipped_arg, args...) COUNT_ARGS(args)
> +#define COUNT_LSMS(args...) __COUNT_LSMS(args)
This wouldn't be needed...
> +
> +#define MAX_LSM_COUNT \
> + COUNT_LSMS( \
> + CAPABILITIES_ENABLED \
> + SELINUX_ENABLED \
> + SMACK_ENABLED \
> + APPARMOR_ENABLED \
> + TOMOYO_ENABLED \
> + YAMA_ENABLED \
> + LOADPIN_ENABLED \
> + LOCKDOWN_ENABLED \
> + BPF_LSM_ENABLED \
> + LANDLOCK_ENABLED)
COUNT_ARGS( \
SELINUX_ENABLED \
SMACK_ENABLED \
...
CAPABILITIES_ENABLED)
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-22 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-22 14:55 [PATCH v4 0/5] Reduce overhead of LSMs with static calls KP Singh
2023-09-22 14:55 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] kernel: Add helper macros for loop unrolling KP Singh
2023-09-22 14:55 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] security: Count the LSMs enabled at compile time KP Singh
2023-09-22 15:50 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2023-09-22 16:07 ` KP Singh
2023-09-27 22:37 ` KP Singh
2023-09-22 14:55 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] security: Replace indirect LSM hook calls with static calls KP Singh
2023-09-23 14:52 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-27 5:26 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-22 14:55 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] bpf: Only enable BPF LSM hooks when an LSM program is attached KP Singh
2023-09-22 14:55 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] security: Add CONFIG_SECURITY_HOOK_LIKELY KP Singh
2023-09-22 15:50 ` Kees Cook
2023-09-22 15:51 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Reduce overhead of LSMs with static calls Kees Cook
2023-09-22 18:42 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-23 16:16 ` KP Singh
2023-09-23 17:13 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-23 17:15 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-24 2:46 ` Kees Cook
2023-09-25 20:08 ` Mateusz Guzik
2023-09-25 22:02 ` Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=202309220848.010A198E7@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=renauld@google.com \
--cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox