From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (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 8E80C125DE for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2024 13:55:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727531714; cv=none; b=DhYaLZXb2cCNi0BfcuOUyVHCkqCl8tTYH+TZFdNl7dI750+1GqMnGqcHBMcFDZwMztTYQyETr4JOi+0uYnjtLWqCNz+tmVhY+RSJDQunTAbXauMI8yX4LY657zixxsx0EG6mOMJAWUzG48TlwOAF+JFABl5LNTjSUwLHh520Dvw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727531714; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CHuyMdPc0Pq0Y00+l0fwVclS4+g9jnElbq/qOBCWgdE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=h7LQTAU8ZSsh60quUVo6fmwfcaFeESPTQmwTdB0rKZQtvzTQtfOdDriKDt7CKG/71lYMMpCCo0Kq32kJnZBYvf0V0gDMDlAZLgggzdnHug8hvOfBqamSV9C4GwbeQJ52c4impNBcDIUVxi3Njbbe06U7bFJybv9u1h1QSYEFRCs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=HtPFC/Ra; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="HtPFC/Ra" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 4D5D341898 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1727531704; bh=wcthUFttYFJfcIQ1UHU0FBtfXP+od6x0ysgOTd9jkeI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=HtPFC/RalC7H1oQjzWPDbVXLgjNJSt52jV4/P4xvLreFdH0Ge/iXnXl7PIcGNqkMe XQ8S1fWkDJWLHsjxzz2/RdJ86Jwxvs2BgY00KGdUIPQgltYxjG78szMMTtnyqLhVEL Sg0q0zv41NgwrD+/Xw6tr42Db9fOypcaX4Fn93MtS8WgG5Nyk8EnPM2TTQx9glHZYH 6XWIeKqPYCZCikPfOvWr5/AsXOOddQ8pgvd2Q3vm+4TrRdKNLakU2ye6FJcauZxSGP FkxMuwDs//7JRKDtfiMgGWqhheDWZwaSq+leqt75g9+iq7OEzCCIikaE3/SH3j6f/l CdDa9o3qCkXyA== Received: from localhost (mdns.lwn.net [45.79.72.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D5D341898; Sat, 28 Sep 2024 13:55:02 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Tetsuo Handa , Linus Torvalds Cc: LKML , Paul Moore Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] tomoyo update for v6.12 In-Reply-To: <0c4b443a-9c72-4800-97e8-a3816b6a9ae2@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> References: <0c4b443a-9c72-4800-97e8-a3816b6a9ae2@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2024 07:54:57 -0600 Message-ID: <877cavdgsu.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Tetsuo Handa writes: > The following changes since commit ada1986d07976d60bed5017aa38b7f7cf27883f7: > > tomoyo: fallback to realpath if symlink's pathname does not exist (2024-09-25 22:30:59 +0900) > > are available in the Git repository at: > > git://git.code.sf.net/p/tomoyo/tomoyo.git tags/tomoyo-pr-20240927 > > for you to fetch changes up to ada1986d07976d60bed5017aa38b7f7cf27883f7: > > tomoyo: fallback to realpath if symlink's pathname does not exist (2024-09-25 22:30:59 +0900) > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > One bugfix patch, one preparation patch, and one conversion patch. [...] > I was delivering pure LKM version of TOMOYO (named AKARI) to users who > cannot afford rebuilding their distro kernels with TOMOYO enabled. But > since the LSM framework was converted to static calls, it became more > difficult to deliver AKARI to such users. Therefore, I decided to update > TOMOYO so that people can use mostly LKM version of TOMOYO with minimal > burden for both distributors and users. I must confess that this change confuses me a bit. Loadable LSM modules have been out of the picture for a long time, has that changed now? Even stranger, to me at least, is the backdoor symbol-export mechanism. That seems like ... not the way we do things. Was the need for this so urgent that you couldn't try to get those symbols exported properly? Thanks, jon