On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 4:55 PM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 10:45 AM Anna Schumaker > <anna.schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 8:34 PM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:53 PM Casey Schaufler <casey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 3/2/2021 10:20 AM, Anna Schumaker wrote: > > > > > Hi Casey, > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:40 PM Olga Kornievskaia > > > > > <olga.kornievskaia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > >> From: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > >> > > > > >> Add a new hook that takes an existing super block and a new mount > > > > >> with new options and determines if new options confict with an > > > > >> existing mount or not. > > > > >> > > > > >> A filesystem can use this new hook to determine if it can share > > > > >> the an existing superblock with a new superblock for the new mount. > > > > >> > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Do you have any other thoughts on this patch? I'm also wondering how > > > > > you want to handle sending it upstream. > > > > > > > > James Morris is the maintainer for the security sub-system, > > > > so you'll want to send this through him. He will want you to > > > > have an ACK from Paul Moore, who is the SELinux maintainer. > > > > > > In the past I've pulled patches such as this (new LSM hook, with only > > > a SELinux implementation of the new hook) in via the selinux/next tree > > > after the other LSMs have ACK'd the new hook. This helps limit merge > > > problems with other SELinux changes and allows us (the SELinux folks) > > > to include it in the ongoing testing that we do during the -rcX > > > releases. > > > > > > So Anna, if you or anyone else on the NFS side of the house want to > > > add your ACKs/REVIEWs/etc. please do so as I don't like merging > > > patches that cross subsystem boundaries without having all the > > > associated ACKs. Casey, James, and other LSM folks please do the > > > same. > > > > Sure: > > Acked-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Are you also going to take patch 3/3 that uses the new hook, or should > > that go through the NFS tree? Patch 2/3 is a cleanup that can go > > through the NFS tree. > > Generally when patches are posted as patchsets I would apply the whole > patchset assuming they patches were all good, however it does seem > like patch 2/3 is not strictly related to the other two? That said, > as long as your ACK applies to all three patches in the patchset I > have no problem applying all of them to the selinux/next tree once > some of the other LSM maintainers provide their ACKs (while there may > only a SELinux implementation of the hook at the moment, we need to > make sure the other LSMs are okay with the basic hook concept). > > Also, did the v4 posting only include patch 1/3? I see v3 postings > for the other two patches, but the only v4 patch I see is 1/3 ... ? I didn't not repost patches that didn't change. > > -- > paul moore > www.paul-moore.com
