From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B38A4374D1; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 08:31:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710923487; cv=none; b=kAhXX2VgJ5N2XeI+u7raujJISqegPsM2XumTnGuTK00HElmotvgTYPvDGGmqlPv+ILe6l0HRoIynh2QJDBmfiK05yb1yHaUnq7Q7cJw1uxsLzx1tdaLNFgWC71Dx7HmzYGNEAJx6EawVfCtD9s9aA/WSbqfqbo9uK6CqWgAVHeA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710923487; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uYuOLvaXC5zSq3rbHgQsBek5irtHYbjs7ZmCE5k/uss=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:From:To: References:In-Reply-To; b=gVa19b7jQc023Q3T8xaD8kRSecTfXwrkxmBT5fUL7zItTBBxVzvfduegmp1mLGJ/bKwGLrg8HDQWHOvAfTXuVK2GuuPN5lQWtRIMxSNSJQ8gTe4ZpFau5SQX2IOEfHlb/av9+5Qey/QC+rnXvxX6alwtCJAe5jR7ROwi/Xhcr5s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=sKpWsAr4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="sKpWsAr4" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00C74C43390; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 08:31:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1710923487; bh=uYuOLvaXC5zSq3rbHgQsBek5irtHYbjs7ZmCE5k/uss=; h=Date:Cc:Subject:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=sKpWsAr4TQ5rJV1WPhGCeqlhhUwoMVPpLdKthHy3bJrVYHFHZts4lMprouJz0I6eG WSGIgnXJVxT2yfrbfqjWJwR1xQEMd2bfzn/sDtwPtTcRYCpsC/4aSdhmgqdmtuXSUP RjYeeVQPvPM6kmVEPMwynycGLfB/KvylQNpUeg+wYzGwmk+nRJGdtS7P2hSeh1Mksa Qc/GE9Gl9vV/KQf1tCmkv6fplFpS1ArvtJEcwM/jiuI6DZdG96JI9uu2n+cBbZcDkH TdC5SArIBmgJEFk1ouTq9JnFB5BNeXKwDSPGREG7Mi92MVJy0RomdjJKSOuaX7IqOt CE+j33cNYxpbw== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:31:21 +0200 Message-Id: Cc: , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v15 12/21] security: add security_bdev_setintegrity() hook From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" To: "Jarkko Sakkinen" , "Paul Moore" , "Fan Wu" , , , , , , , , , , X-Mailer: aerc 0.15.2 References: <1710560151-28904-13-git-send-email-wufan@linux.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: On Wed Mar 20, 2024 at 10:28 AM EET, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Wed Mar 20, 2024 at 1:00 AM EET, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Mar 15, 2024 Fan Wu wrote: > > >=20 > > > This patch introduces a new hook to save block device's integrity > > > data. For example, for dm-verity, LSMs can use this hook to save > > > the roothash signature of a dm-verity into the security blob, > > > and LSMs can make access decisions based on the data inside > > > the signature, like the signer certificate. > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Fan Wu > > >=20 > > > -- > > > v1-v14: > > > + Not present > > >=20 > > > v15: > > > + Introduced > > >=20 > > > --- > > > include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h | 2 ++ > > > include/linux/security.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ > > > security/security.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 3 files changed, 44 insertions(+) > > > > I'm not sure why you made this a separate patch, help? If there is > > no significant reason why this is separate, please squash it together > > with patch 11/21. > > Off-topic: it is weird to have *RFC* patch set at v15. > > RFC by de-facto is something that can be safely ignored if you don't > have bandwidth. 15 versions of anything that can be safely ignored > is by definition spamming :-) I mean just conceptually. > > So does the RFC still hold or what the heck is going on with this one? > > Haven't followed for some time now... I mean if this RFC trend continues I'll just put auto-filter for this thread to put straight to the bin. There's enough non-RFC patch sets to review. BR, Jarkko