[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