[PATCH v4 1/3] [security] Add new hook to compare new mount to an existing mount
paul at paul-moore.com
Fri Mar 12 21:54:58 UTC 2021
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 10:45 AM Anna Schumaker
<anna.schumaker at netapp.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 8:34 PM Paul Moore <paul at paul-moore.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:53 PM Casey Schaufler <casey at schaufler-ca.com> wrote:
> > > On 3/2/2021 10:20 AM, Anna Schumaker wrote:
> > > > Hi Casey,
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:40 PM Olga Kornievskaia
> > > > <olga.kornievskaia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> From: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga at netapp.com>
> > > >>
> > > >> Add a new hook that takes an existing super block and a new mount
> > > >> with new options and determines if new options confict with an
> > > >> existing mount or not.
> > > >>
> > > >> A filesystem can use this new hook to determine if it can share
> > > >> the an existing superblock with a new superblock for the new mount.
> > > >>
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga at netapp.com>
> > > > Do you have any other thoughts on this patch? I'm also wondering how
> > > > you want to handle sending it upstream.
> > >
> > > James Morris is the maintainer for the security sub-system,
> > > so you'll want to send this through him. He will want you to
> > > have an ACK from Paul Moore, who is the SELinux maintainer.
> > In the past I've pulled patches such as this (new LSM hook, with only
> > a SELinux implementation of the new hook) in via the selinux/next tree
> > after the other LSMs have ACK'd the new hook. This helps limit merge
> > problems with other SELinux changes and allows us (the SELinux folks)
> > to include it in the ongoing testing that we do during the -rcX
> > releases.
> > So Anna, if you or anyone else on the NFS side of the house want to
> > add your ACKs/REVIEWs/etc. please do so as I don't like merging
> > patches that cross subsystem boundaries without having all the
> > associated ACKs. Casey, James, and other LSM folks please do the
> > same.
> Acked-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker at Netapp.com>
> Are you also going to take patch 3/3 that uses the new hook, or should
> that go through the NFS tree? Patch 2/3 is a cleanup that can go
> through the NFS tree.
Generally when patches are posted as patchsets I would apply the whole
patchset assuming they patches were all good, however it does seem
like patch 2/3 is not strictly related to the other two? That said,
as long as your ACK applies to all three patches in the patchset I
have no problem applying all of them to the selinux/next tree once
some of the other LSM maintainers provide their ACKs (while there may
only a SELinux implementation of the hook at the moment, we need to
make sure the other LSMs are okay with the basic hook concept).
Also, did the v4 posting only include patch 1/3? I see v3 postings
for the other two patches, but the only v4 patch I see is 1/3 ... ?
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive