On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 11:56 AM Paul Moore <p...@paul-moore.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 7:13 AM Xu Kuohai <xukuo...@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > > > > From: Xu Kuohai <xukuo...@huawei.com> > > > > LSM BPF prog returning a positive number attached to the hook > > file_alloc_security makes kernel panic. > > ... > > > Xu Kuohai (20): > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook vm_enough_memory > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook inode_need_killpriv > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook inode_getsecurity > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook inode_listsecurity > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook inode_copy_up_xattr > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook getselfattr > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook setprocattr > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook getprocattr > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook key_getsecurity > > lsm: Refactor return value of LSM hook audit_rule_match > > bpf, lsm: Add disabled BPF LSM hook list > > bpf, lsm: Enable BPF LSM prog to read/write return value parameters > > bpf, lsm: Add check for BPF LSM return value > > bpf: Prevent tail call between progs attached to different hooks > > bpf: Fix compare error in function retval_range_within > > bpf: Add a special case for bitwise AND on range [-1, 0] > > selftests/bpf: Avoid load failure for token_lsm.c > > selftests/bpf: Add return value checks for failed tests > > selftests/bpf: Add test for lsm tail call > > selftests/bpf: Add verifier tests for bpf lsm > > I'm not quite sure what happened, but it looks like patches 13/20 > through 20/20 did not hit the mailing lists, see lore link below; did > you have any mail failures when sending the patchset? Regardless, can > you sort this out and resend the patchset? > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240711111908.3817636-1-xukuo...@huaweicloud.com
Oh wait, it looks like the patchset was split in lore somehow, nevermind. The "missing" patches are here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240711113828.3818398-1-xukuo...@huaweicloud.com -- paul-moore.com
