lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf: Implement bpf_local_storage for inodes
On 26-May 22:08, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 06:33:34PM +0200, KP Singh wrote:
> > From: KP Singh <kpsingh@google.com>
> >
> > Similar to bpf_local_storage for sockets, add local storage for inodes.
> > The life-cycle of storage is managed with the life-cycle of the inode.
> > i.e. the storage is destroyed along with the owning inode.
> >
> > Since, the intention is to use this in LSM programs, the destruction is
> > done after security_inode_free in __destroy_inode.
>
> NAK onbloating the inode structure. Please find an out of line way
> to store your information.

The other alternative is to use lbs_inode (security blobs) and we can
do this without adding fields to struct inode.

Here is a rough diff (only illustrative, won't apply cleanly) of the
changes needed to this patch:

https://gist.github.com/sinkap/1d213d17fb82a5e8ffdc3f320ec37d79

Once tracing has gets a whitelist based access to inode storage, I
guess it, too, can use bpf_local_storage for inodes if CONFIG_BPF_LSM
is enabled. Does this sound reasonable to the BPF folks?

- KP


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-27 14:39    [W:0.104 / U:1.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site