[PATCH v10 1/9] fs: move kernel_read_file* to its own include file

[Scott Branden]

On 2020-07-07 4:40 p.m., Kees Cook wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 04:23:01PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
>> Move kernel_read_file* out of linux/fs.h to its own linux/kernel_read_file.h
>> include file. That header gets pulled in just about everywhere
>> and doesn't really need functions not related to the general fs interface.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Scott Branden <scott.branden at broadcom.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de>
>> Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/base/firmware_loader/main.c |  1 +
>>   fs/exec.c                           |  1 +
>>   include/linux/fs.h                  | 39 ----------------------
>>   include/linux/ima.h                 |  1 +
>>   include/linux/kernel_read_file.h    | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   include/linux/security.h            |  1 +
>>   kernel/kexec_file.c                 |  1 +
>>   kernel/module.c                     |  1 +
>>   security/integrity/digsig.c         |  1 +
>>   security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c     |  1 +
>>   security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c   |  1 +
>>   security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c |  1 +
>>   security/loadpin/loadpin.c          |  1 +
>>   security/security.c                 |  1 +
>>   security/selinux/hooks.c            |  1 +
>>   15 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>>   create mode 100644 include/linux/kernel_read_file.h
> This looks like too many files are getting touched. If it got added to
> security.h, very few of the above .c files will need it explicitly
> added (maybe none).
Some people want the header file added to each file that uses it,
others want it in a common header file.  I tried to add it to each file 
that uses it.
But if the other approach is to be followed that could be done.
> You can test future versions of this change with an
> allmodconfig build and make sure you have a matching .o for each .c
> file that calls kernel_read_file(). :)
>
> But otherwise, sure, seems good.
>