From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 4BAB4349CFF for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 08:32:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791966759; cv=none; b=KvpT8t2mexOPnN1qpsikDWk+cI09y373FJklkaHVagMfSl7uaSeuo5gs5U0T0iqY5I+EeS6yZxQ5NUzeX7xmzWEXsQrI4B8yqVEdY7v0cOd8BHBXw6vjlXLdJ+G3Qguw2uCIoSZUPmA0PnoEMnMm8SjPsccIiC0wesJsTfadirY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791966759; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eAh1cgbDtQgyIAOx1Q1vPKQLdsgYTRt8G8un4nEIHE4=; h=Message-ID:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date; b=Txj3QYL/D0QDFnoI+fE2/cKTBmGSUzImyiMtcl/xqqAT2r+GFzV6Vnq4xkxdFeD921mGzpDj5dOqdbMhbmZgl8JOz9ibyzAFa0jcv8HvkEfiSBI/UU9wBchGjZ6FpMSpIZ3/Mz1s4eQMnkkFvk2aBEbTIZB/6IdY6ShCLcD3T0c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=EDzZoAsC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="EDzZoAsC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BF6F61F000FF for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2026 08:32:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1791966757; bh=SbjqVdvu6OAeevLMHMp7ZKgFcjGnUZ7f6Q3UTiFUiCc=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=EDzZoAsCRA+tI5VEdvw/7zrL6OjI035lqBsMluO63FHvOiwdNm1AdrKlSXJgLdcXk gMwsII5usUHKMo+DmGn3gv2+Yojb00gjIWlt/qIv8lL1Wns6/2L11XHmS/aPbhDOf2 Q2IlUne4kX/NwRw0oU61Fx5mEydFp5gvuVaAiiBI+I2MJJpzECIGdhRiPf4iPSQH+f K5cUy9fUkxMFlOKNVbJg2kdOAHLStSYk/Iyr77YBFq4uYq64dA+gSVcL1xA73YdtEp XN/iJNc5Jtxt7M8UYq0kMj0NZMaIKMcpXkIcDu3q8zeQv0uR+GH+v8crLlOPnRYruj yy0UBG3SXpjBQ== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/8] landlock: Wrap per-layer access masks in struct layer_config Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261014082718.1435842-3-mic@digikod.net> References: <20261014082718.1435842-1-mic@digikod.net> <20261014082718.1435842-3-mic@digikod.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 08:32:37 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > The domain layer FAM stores struct access_masks values directly, while a > ruleset stores the equivalent single mutable value. Per-category > permissions need additional per-layer data beyond the handled-access > bitfields. >=20 > Introduce struct layer_config as the common value type. Keeping the > handled bitfields in its .handled member leaves struct access_masks as a > lightweight parameter type for functions that only need those bitfields, > while the complete layer can be snapshotted with one assignment. >=20 > At this point struct layer_config only wraps the four-byte access_masks, > so it does not grow the per-domain allocation: the maximum 16-entry FAM > remains 64 bytes. >=20 > No functional change. >=20 > Cc: G=C3=BCnther Noack > Reviewed-by: G=C3=BCnther Noack > Reviewed-by: Tingmao Wang > Signed-off-by: Micka=C3=ABl Sala=C3=BCn Sashiko has reviewed this patch and found no issues. It looks great! --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261014082718.1435= 842-1-mic@digikod.net?part=3D2