From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yw1-f178.google.com (mail-yw1-f178.google.com [209.85.128.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A0F94B95DD for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2026 15:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.178 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791387027; cv=none; b=eO0YxAQBgWhYNeNY24qKyGDRQQVlee0ycgPjf/TxOvQ/jpFjrYyHZcS+3Ue87sIIze49tYTcrM5x3BZ9MK2hzxR4LNfhrVnS816USNkq8OYsq0/BwnW7j3R/o2TQaHpmE2BDS8U/FUQJPfq6D3dvFsUSuwObPf2YUvGEmrpb4pA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791387027; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5kpnZ69rpIeJK7I/vVJI1/Sd58TTWJsQUlkCNqKOhyI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=JdIR9rEEKyuC4k5lJ8LBZZl3+9+sIWv/TjdqD6gO5JXYY5nBxnw6JEFnTjNxrryw4h5jTKC7o8t9k5MAaw/e69vwvchAKZzQdQ5IHF9HxvPlu2/nfE6A3qOrhiZmxo5M3HnuhuL2RKiB34ZPf93t//vR9Wne/4IZXZ/wmPaBVIM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=amutable.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=amutable.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=amutable-com.20251104.gappssmtp.com header.i=@amutable-com.20251104.gappssmtp.com header.b=nbIVZW8x; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.178 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=amutable.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=amutable.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=amutable-com.20251104.gappssmtp.com header.i=@amutable-com.20251104.gappssmtp.com header.b="nbIVZW8x" Received: by mail-yw1-f178.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-8b056d58f2aso14935127b3.2 for ; Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:30:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amutable-com.20251104.gappssmtp.com; s=20251104; t=1791387019; x=1791991819; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=fxMsGMJoi15xhCerKdZHKbDFnpM/+Dr7cx060hZaVDo=; b=nbIVZW8x6yRUaum0/NaXz+CYWEfQTRGJ4zJtngSWMsYQtkOGi8elr0WKM4KlycXf7M ZYtezpLIy/UKQKNAvTxmCB1sHTJ3MeYRATEv/eFP1y0aY56YZuc5gFvl04CP0A0g9x7y zm81vcg6RFEYXpp8LLx9OV4HMPrFFzVtkLw4rhKpCurEdhUwhRqRDdmjZTOT9Fy9QIU2 huq0K3kQY5dMfN6mx2ywyrQQFt/cQMGhwmkGUWotJe7YflHDH/RNMDiqDV6mGAZOOD/X S74K5D9VNxhsZ3Yl0a/GXhf4YEPj5ShJCSkczcGOkEscqS3sjBt/F8wAb67jtIzemEpW dPjQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1791387019; x=1791991819; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=fxMsGMJoi15xhCerKdZHKbDFnpM/+Dr7cx060hZaVDo=; b=ExbUOCFmSvhGvQYqkKLIKvdGyJ1T2I2wN0vEojUGOAd1HXAtvlal4R4nY7leyR3Jn5 o8LFXmS+vc5B1rJZjCc8PRtgpOgTSSAc+BHSVL229mgvxDylEOc97kgfm4b6dKHakrQq afK/1hkMib2HgZD02cf0cuBuc8kf7ynQK5Q2PLkCehbNJEzpDb1wjNfNrrRnKhslm7ML JIoFqR2XuEQ2tZjkYnXiWmH0ZNVqBsbRFdhZ16tzGp/FrTCKT+UNg/Fy4fiBwO4lGHPc bejKFnFUG12aSps4o4Qxw9C0hj8irIckXdlnmBVJF0Ee8z7JtN6I38/ty/PTBB84MqE8 Kf4A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvByKIgqYrA6BG+DV3AKjhWLomRrpTygGlZ+3qtgkuZlxCAGbq4fKDbnmjGEtd7Au8Phv5cXujxOUag==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AFq9FYLazq1E2778gugq/PCnOSEqZ71qTTKzcAvMpHSUeQBfl5iVwp0D M0bl6p4uAg6N/0qowXbmkZCHJHUnnlW7g44kOdW8fUhoLBtVEd2TTCKQH7Jj+QlZQRta X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou23q/9vKWaag2Ft74xF3I0i8jH9LDulWdl+CM6GzOt4ZMMpKVY4hUejrXL65gL V6vRSUP5uZSxNOM6JfHkisz3CAQaG6iaPvJnH3dNzcxmlszB1ytnC7BEehfeFK2A4BTsmn4xYqU JQircueZm3NQKfDn1mx3lJbR4q5quOfRhpKavXx6M+yvCkNIZdSGA93Ah+gJzw8fke+IdQfIqnx lNenBS9H6jNv8A/7RtTgHmSickcajGyFyO/ewmtcma4o5YVA7RFUwyTEQ92XE8Y4e6JM+7eYf8V zGJKQhQCqj8xmlomo69MHLspjeEFNZkR6T4Jx4nlTYpCVRnYy3KEnzVDNOzdijo6nOF8oAJ5v2M pEA+JAMqxunGpDG8lDZZnS8ngC/eqeGvicfmBtElSEVMrRft60TIe8diwL4dHK4pgbUIGqulGq/ R6BKcZrYM3MMEKN2b9o4P20HRDuHnSwbPuLJuhlrSlwnmkAU5BmwTueJ1t80X4n9TA3or9A9ZqO +gSr5B/vfKvOZXVRFWUz1X9HGKdGfCtVG/4861k3S4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:690c:6b01:b0:873:5bb2:6c3d with SMTP id 00721157ae682-8b05b14e894mr18727417b3.68.1791387018749; Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from toolbx (104-53-165-62.lightspeed.stlsmo.sbcglobal.net. [104.53.165.62]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 00721157ae682-8b05a9b8806sm9897427b3.1.2026.10.07.08.30.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:30:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2026 10:30:14 -0500 From: Andrew Halaney To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: David Howells , Alasdair Kergon , Mike Snitzer , Mikulas Patocka , Benjamin Marzinski , Paul Moore , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Eric Biggers , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , Randy Dunlap , dm-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, fsverity@lists.linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, "Christian Brauner (Amutable)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] keys: add KEY_SPEC_DM_VERITY_KEYRING Message-ID: References: <20260914-ajhalaney-dmverity-key-identifier-v1-0-01922dc1366a@amutable.com> <20260914-ajhalaney-dmverity-key-identifier-v1-1-01922dc1366a@amutable.com> <715249.1789718726@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: fsverity@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 11:39:28AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 02:59:49PM -0500, Andrew Halaney wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 09:05:26AM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > > Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > > > > > > This is great for discussion but what we want for the commit message > > > > is just motivation and resolution. > > > > > > Actually, I think it's useful that Andrew wrote up the issues in the commit > > > message - and I think it shows part of the motivation. The 'writing a fake > > > /proc/keys line in the description' is something I hadn't considered. > > > > I'll defer to what you all want in the message here, I found it valuable > > but I trend on the side of overly verbose admittedly! > > > > > > > > > I don't think we need all this just to say that /proc/keys in a racy > > > > query mechanism for production, which is an issue for dm-verity, given > > > > that nothing else is available. > > > > > > I think at some point, we will need a system call to search all for all > > > accessible keys matching certain criteria by actually walking the key > > > database. The problem there is that there may be multiple hits, so we may > > > need something like: > > > > > > int count = find_key(key_serial_t start_id, > > > const char *type, const char *desc_prefix, > > > key_serial_t *results, size_t results_size, > > > unsigned int flags); > > > > > > Allowing you to do: > > > > > > key_serial_t dm_key; > > > int n = find_key(0, "keyring", ".dm_verity", &dm_key, 1, > > > FIND_KEY_EXACT_DESC); > > > > > > This wouldn't be as fast as a direct lookup since it would have to walk the > > > key tree, doing name comparisons and perm checks on each key of the type. > > > > > > > And secondly special keys are meant for implicit keyrings so isn't > > > > that all there's to it? > > > > > > I have no particular objection to setting aside a block of negative key IDs > > > for special keyrings that need to be accessed a lot - though I would make > > > common reg/unreg functions that take the ID to be registered and, say, set the > > > block at -257..-512. Moving the BFP keyring to -257 and DM to -258. > > > > To be clear are you suggesting I do that for v2 here? Happy to make the > > change and add some reuse to the registration functions, etc. I'm > > guessing its fine to change the bpf id since its still only in -next? > > > > The only awkward bit with making that more generic is that dm-verity > > isn't __ro_after_init since its coming from a module possibly, and > > because of the module usage I also protected it with a spinlock in case > > someone's accessing it while you unload the module. Could just use one > > spinlock for the whole generic array, and drop the __ro_after_init I > > suppose. > > > > Let me know if I'm not following properly! > > I just read David's response and I think he made fair arguments, > and patches look fine to me. > > David, did you have anything? I could pick these. > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen > Gentle ping :) Are we happy with these to get picked up? Thanks, Andrew