[PATCH v16 05/12] KEYS: Move KEY_LOOKUP_ to include/linux/key.h and define KEY_LOOKUP_ALL

[Roberto Sassu]

On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 00:38 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 04:33:11PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu at huawei.com>
> > 
> > In preparation for the patch that introduces the
> > bpf_lookup_user_key() eBPF
> > kfunc, move KEY_LOOKUP_ definitions to include/linux/key.h, to be
> > able to
> > validate the kfunc parameters. Add them to enum key_lookup_flag, so
> > that
> > all the current ones and the ones defined in the future are
> > automatically
> > exported through BTF and available to eBPF programs.
> > 
> > Also, add KEY_LOOKUP_ALL to the enum, to facilitate checking
> > whether a
> > variable contains only defined flags.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu at huawei.com>
> > Reviewed-by: KP Singh <kpsingh at kernel.org>
> > Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko at kernel.org>
> 
> You should remove ack if there is any substantial change.

Yes, sorry. I thought you were fine with the change due to:

https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/YxF4H9MTDj+PnJ+V@kernel.org/

> 
> > ---
> >  include/linux/key.h      | 6 ++++++
> >  security/keys/internal.h | 2 --
> >  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/key.h b/include/linux/key.h
> > index 7febc4881363..d84171f90cbd 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/key.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/key.h
> > @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ enum key_need_perm {
> >  	KEY_DEFER_PERM_CHECK,	/* Special: permission check is
> > deferred */
> >  };
> >  
> > +enum key_lookup_flag {
> > +	KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE = 0x01,	/* Create special keyrings if they
> > don't exist */
> > +	KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL = 0x02,	/* Permit partially constructed
> > keys to be found */
> > +	KEY_LOOKUP_ALL = (KEY_LOOKUP_CREATE | KEY_LOOKUP_PARTIAL), /*
> > OR of previous flags */
> 
> Drop the comments (should be reviewed separately + out of context).

The same style is used for many definitions in include/linux/key.h

No problem to remove them, please just let me know where they should
be. Often, eBPF maintainers asked me to add a description to the code
to explain how new definitions should be used.

Thanks

Roberto