BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Justin Suess" <utilityemal77@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next 06/12] bpf: add a path ancestor iterator
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2026 00:30:53 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261006003053.B17D31F00893@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261006002020.2890858-7-utilityemal77@gmail.com>

> Let BPF programs evaluate a path's ancestry with an open-coded iterator
> over the stepwise vfs_walk_ancestors() engine.  The iteration holds a
> reference on its current position, which is what lets a program sleep
> between positions - a dput() of the last reference may - so the kfuncs
> are KF_SLEEPABLE and the iterator is available to sleepable programs
> only.  That covers the LSM hooks a path-based policy attaches to:
> file_open, file_permission, the path_* hooks, mmap_file and bprm_* are
> all in the sleepable allowlist.
> 
> bpf_iter_path_ancestors_next() hands each position to the program as an
> acquired reference of its own, to release with bpf_path_put().  The
> walk's own reference moves on with the walk and is dropped at the next
> step, so it cannot be what keeps a position alive: a program that saves
> a position's dentry, or hands one to a sleepable kfunc, needs it to
> outlive the step it came from.  struct path is a value type with nothing
> [ ... ]
> slot from it, so growing it later would reject programs built against
> the smaller one.  The walk mode is a parameter of the shared engine for
> the same reason - so that a mode added later is not an ABI change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>

Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great!

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261006002020.2890858-1-utilityemal77@gmail.com?part=6


  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-06  0:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-06  0:20 [RFC PATCH bpf-next 00/12] fs: unified VFS ancestor walk for Landlock and BPF Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 01/12] namei: introduce __path_walk_parent() Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:27   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 02/12] namei: add vfs_walk_ancestors() Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:30   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 03/12] landlock: convert ancestor walk to vfs_walk_ancestors() Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:27   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  1:10   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 04/12] bpf: mark struct path trusted Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:34   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  1:10   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 05/12] namei: make vfs_walk_ancestors() stepwise Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:30   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 06/12] bpf: add a path ancestor iterator Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:30   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-06  1:11   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 07/12] selftests/bpf: exercise the " Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:28   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  1:10   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 08/12] fs: add mnt_undo_legitimize() Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:28   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 09/12] namei: add an rcu-walk mode to the ancestor walk Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:33   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  1:10   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 10/12] bpf: support "__uninit" iterator arguments in generic kfuncs Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:37   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06 14:58     ` Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 11/12] bpf: add a lockless path ancestor iterator Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:31   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  1:10   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-06 14:44     ` Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:20 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 12/12] selftests/bpf: exercise the " Justin Suess
2026-10-06  0:25   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-06  1:10   ` bot+bpf-ci

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=20261006003053.B17D31F00893@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=utilityemal77@gmail.com \
    /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