Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 3/4] bpf: add bpf_init_inode_xattr kfunc for atomic inode labeling

On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 7:11=E2=80=AFPM David Windsor <[email protected]> =
wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 6:23=E2=80=AFPM Paul Moore <[email protected]> =
wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 6:04=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 11:49 PM CEST, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 5:29=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 10:48 PM CEST, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 4:16=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> > > >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 10:01 PM CEST, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 3:20=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Kartikeya Dwive=
di
> > > >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 9:05 PM CEST, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 2:50=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Kartikeya Dw=
ivedi
> > > >> >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 8:42 PM CEST, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 2:18=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Kartikeya=
 Dwivedi
> > > >> >> >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 6:59 PM CEST, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 12:32=E2=80=AFPM Kumar Karti=
keya Dwivedi
> > > >> >> >> >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 6:02 PM CEST, Paul Moore wro=
te:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 11:44=E2=80=AFAM Kumar Ka=
rtikeya Dwivedi
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri Jul 31, 2026 at 5:30 PM CEST, David Winds=
or wrote:
> > > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 11:17=E2=80=AFAM Paul =
Moore <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > As a consequence, everyone suffers because they first need to satisfy=
 your whims
> > > on how all code and kfuncs written thus far are wrong, and need to be=
 moved
> > > around ASAP, including the one being proposed.
> >
> > That's not a reasonble or truthful summary of things, I've only
> > requested that David locate his proposed kfunc in
> > security/bpf_lsm_kfuncs.c, I never suggested he move any others.
>
> Looking at what's left of the kfunc itself, it's basically nothing.
> Everything meaningful has been moved into security/ already.
>
> Aside from bpf dynptr ops, what's left is:
>
> if (!name__str)
>     return -EINVAL;
>
> if (strncmp(name__str, XATTR_BPF_LSM_SUFFIX, sizeof(XATTR_BPF_LSM_SUFFIX)=
 - 1))
>     return -EPERM;
>
> if (!xattrs->xattrs)
>     return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>
> ... then a call to security_lsmxattr_add. Why not move this chunk into
> security_lsmxattr_add, and leave the remaining bits, which are pure
> bpf, in fs/ for now, and litigate the total placement of all of them
> once v7 lands?

Thanks David, but my comments and decision are based on the kfunc as a
whole, not necessarily how the work is divided between the kfunc and
the LSM hook it calls; shuffling bits of code between the two doesn't
change the character of the function.

--=20
paul-moore.com