On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 3:10 PM Paul Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It's still Nack. > > Based solely on the diffstat and a quick look, this appears to be an > LSM patchset, not necessarily a BPF patchset; yes, there are kfuncs, > but they are LSM/audit kfuncs and not core BPF functionality. > Regardless, I want to see how the LSS presentation is received before > worrying about this too much, but your NACK has been noted.
Paul, told you countless times LSM cannot touch BPF bits without explicit Ack. So, no, you cannot add bpf kfuncs in random places in the kernel And, no, you cannot call bpf internals through bpf_map_ops, etc.
