On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 09:25:24AM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On 2024-11-24 15:45:04-0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 2:19 AM Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > The hooks got renamed, adapt the BTF IDs.
> > > Fixes the following build warning:
> > >
> > > BTFIDS vmlinux
> > > WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lsm_task_getsecid_obj
> > > WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lsm_current_getsecid_subj
> > >
> > > Fixes: 37f670aacd48 ("lsm: use lsm_prop in security_current_getsecid")
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c | 4 ++--
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> > > index 3bc61628ab251e05d7837eb27dabc3b62bcc4783..5be76572ab2e8a0c6e18a81f9e4c14812a11aad2 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> > > @@ -375,8 +375,8 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_socket_socketpair)
> > >
> > > BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_syslog)
> > > BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_alloc)
> > > -BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_current_getsecid_subj)
> > > -BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_getsecid_obj)
> > > +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_current_getlsmprop_subj)
> > > +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_task_getlsmprop_obj)
> >
> > Maybe we can remove these two instead?
> > I couldn't come up with a reason for bpf_lsm to attach to these two.
>
> Personally I have no idea about bps_lsm, how it works or how it is used.
> I only tried to get rid of the warning.
> If you prefer I can drop the IDs.
>
> In my opinion this is a discussion that would have been better in
> the original patch, if the CI would have caught it.
I agree with Alexei here, we can probably just remove these
instead. ATM, I don't think we could do anything useful with them from
the context of a BPF LSM program anyway.
