On Fri, Mar 07 2025, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Pratyush Yadav <ptyadav@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> With FDBox in place, add documentation that describes what it is and how >> it is used, along with its UAPI and in-kernel API. >> >> Since the document refers to KHO, add a reference tag in kho/index.rst. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pratyush Yadav <ptyadav@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/filesystems/locking.rst | 21 +++ >> Documentation/kho/fdbox.rst | 224 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> Documentation/kho/index.rst | 3 + >> MAINTAINERS | 1 + >> 4 files changed, 249 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/kho/fdbox.rst > > Please do not create a new top-level directory under Documentation for > this; your new file belongs in userspace-api/. I did not. The top-level directory comes from the KHO patches [0] (not merged yet). This series is based on top of those. You can find the full tree here [1]. Since this is closely tied to KHO I found it a good fit for putting it on KHO's directory. I don't have strong opinions about this so don't mind moving it elsewhere if you think that is better. > > From a quick perusal of your documentation: > > - You never say what "KHO" is fdbox.rst has a reference to Documentation/kho/index.rst which does explain what Kexec Handover (KHO) means. Due to the ref to the top-level heading, the rendered text looks like: > The primary purpose of FDBox is to be used with Kexec Handover Subsystem. This is a link to kho/index.rst ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ IMO that is enough explanation, and there would be little benefit in duplicating the explanation for KHO. Do you still think a one or two line explanation is warranted here? > > - Your boxes live in a single global namespace? Yes. Should they not? FWIW, the boxes are in a global namespace, but each box has a namespace of its own for naming FDs. All FD names in a single box should be unique but the same FD name can be used in two different boxes. > > - What sort of access control applies to one of these boxes? What keeps > me from mucking around inside somebody else's box? For now, none. You need CAP_SYS_ADMIN to be able to muck around with a box. The current idea is that we only let root use it and if more a fine grained permission model needed it can be done in userspace, or we can extend our permission model later. [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250206132754.2596694-10-rppt@xxxxxxxxxx/ [1] https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pratyush/linux.git/tree/Documentation/kho?h=kho -- Regards, Pratyush Yadav