On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 05:23:24PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote: > > OK, I will verify that the SELinux submount fix rebased on top of > > vfs/work.mount in the way I suggested above passes the same testing > > (seliinux-testsuite + NFS crossmnt reproducer). I am now building two > > kernels (vfs/work.mount with and without the fix) to test. Let me know > > if there is anything more to do. > > Thanks. > > The big thing is just making sure that we don't regress on the fix in > selinux/next if/when David's mount rework hits Linus' tree. FWIW, the whole thing is getting massaged/reordered/etc. and I would like some input from you guys at some point - assuming that I recover the ability to talk about LSM without obscenities... Question: what *should* happen if we try to cross into a submount and find that the thing on the other side is already mounted elsewhere, with incompatible LSM options? Ditto for referrals, with an extra twist - what if we are given 3 alternatives, the first two already mounted elsewhere with incompatible options, the third one not mounted anywhere yet? Incidentally, should smack have ->sb_clone_mnt_opts()?
