On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 3:58 PM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > At the end of the v4 patchset I suggested merging this into lsm/next > > so it could get a full -rc cycle in linux-next, assuming no issues > > were uncovered during testing > > What in the world can be uncovered in linux-next for code that has no in > tree users. The patchset provides both BPF LSM and SELinux implementations of the hooks along with a BPF LSM test under tools/testing/selftests/bpf/. If no one beats me to it, I plan to work on adding a test to the selinux-testsuite as soon as I'm done dealing with other urgent LSM/SELinux issues (io_uring CMD passthrough, SCTP problems, etc.); I run these tests multiple times a week (multiple times a day sometimes) against the -rcX kernels with the lsm/next, selinux/next, and audit/next branches applied on top. I know others do similar things. -- paul-moore.com
