[PATCH v5 bpf-next 0/5] bpf path iterator
Song Liu
songliubraving at meta.com
Sat Jul 26 09:52:06 UTC 2025
> On Jul 25, 2025, at 1:35 AM, Mickaël Salaün <mic at digikod.net> wrote:
[...]
>>>
>>> Do my questions above make any sense? Or maybe I totally
>>> misunderstood something?
>>
>> Hi Neil,
>>
>> Did my questions/comments above make sense? I am hoping we can
>> agree on some design soon.
>>
>> Christian and Mickaël,
>>
>> Could you please also share your thoughts on this?
>>
>> Current requirements from BPF side is straightforward: we just
>> need a mechanism to “walk up one level and hold reference”. So
>> most of the requirement comes from LandLock side.
>
> Have you thought about how to handle disconnected directories?
In the case of open-coded path iterator, the iterator will
return a special value for disconnected roots and disconnected
directories. Then the BPF program need to handle them based on
the policy.
Thanks,
Song
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list