From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Graf Subject: Re: [RFC v3 05/22] bpf,landlock: Add eBPF program subtype and is_valid_subtype() verifier Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:01:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20161019150117.GB22003@pox.localdomain> References: <20160914072415.26021-1-mic@digikod.net> <20160914072415.26021-6-mic@digikod.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suug-ch.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=g/Ujb4s4j+qWYIr5IX7NTb81ToHzskK1FZ3kFqctt94=; b=pm9N+hJXn4xbXhLNj6sP1K3BRnIQIzciDeT1igIHbTa/l3y7co98Mgu/wgVx9Av6UQ NGwFBiwBh8KygcKvn5leuhwUaC3obdeFuij9K8U/Jls0xufQyUzDufUVU2+32969PfkG gpHYBEy044ZfXZjKTgrDl7mKUr9wAR0YyRNVLy7HzgvEn6YzeioJRK4ZKvBuVrj3Y8Wo Dd/NEMaug/o15f9vy4VUN4nEgvVI3W453y7P4Fdt38K2nB1ovwAHej5bKOhS9l0A5rEv 58XNF/gzsibM+KwwzXxyun7gYP6uK0OIAU8dqFl7knp2PknUsQ4alFWBWgFPsfuy/GpH 8h0Q== Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160914072415.26021-6-mic@digikod.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Andy Lutomirski , Arnd Bergmann , Casey Schaufler , Daniel Borkmann , Daniel Mack , David Drysdale , "David S . Miller" , Elena Reshetova , "Eric W . Biederman" , James Morris , Kees Cook , Paul Moore , Sargun Dhillon , "Serge E . Hallyn" , Tejun Heo , Will Drewry , kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kern On 09/14/16 at 09:23am, Micka=EBl Sala=FCn wrote: > @@ -155,6 +163,7 @@ union bpf_attr { > __u32 log_size; /* size of user buffer */ > __aligned_u64 log_buf; /* user supplied buffer */ > __u32 kern_version; /* checked when prog_type=3Dkprobe */ > + union bpf_prog_subtype prog_subtype; /* checked when prog_type=3Dlandl= ock */ The comment seems bogus, this is not landlock specific.