From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Ashwin Ganti <ashwin.ganti@gmail.com>,
rsc@swtch.com, ericvh@gmail.com,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Ron Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>,
jt.beard@gmail.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>,
oleg@us.ibm.com, Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] p9auth: add p9auth driver
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:04:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100421030406.GB10258@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100421012908.GB24251@us.ibm.com>
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:29:08PM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> This is a driver that adds Plan 9 style capability device
> implementation. See Documentation/p9auth.txt for a description
> of how to use this.
Hm, you didn't originally write this driver, so it would be good to get
some original authorship information in here to keep everything correct,
right?
> Documentation/p9auth.txt | 47 ++++
> drivers/char/Kconfig | 2 +
> drivers/char/Makefile | 2 +
> drivers/char/p9auth/Kconfig | 9 +
> drivers/char/p9auth/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/char/p9auth/p9auth.c | 517 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Is this code really ready for drivers/char/? What has changed in it
that makes it ok to move out of the staging tree?
And who is going to maintain it? You? Or someone else?
> 6 files changed, 578 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/p9auth.txt
> create mode 100644 drivers/char/p9auth/Kconfig
> create mode 100644 drivers/char/p9auth/Makefile
> create mode 100644 drivers/char/p9auth/p9auth.c
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/p9auth.txt b/Documentation/p9auth.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..14a69d8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/p9auth.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
> +The p9auth device driver implements a plan-9 factotum-like
> +capability API. Tasks which are privileged (authorized by
> +possession of the CAP_GRANT_ID privilege (POSIX capability))
> +can write new capabilities to /dev/caphash. The kernel then
> +stores these until a task uses them by writing to the
> +/dev/capuse device. Each capability represents the ability
> +for a task running as userid X to switch to userid Y and
> +some set of groups. Each capability may be used only once,
> +and unused capabilities are cleared after two minutes.
> +
> +The following examples shows how to use the API. Shell 1
> +contains a privileged root shell. Shell 2 contains an
> +unprivileged shell as user 501 in the same user namespace. If
> +not already done, the privileged shell should create the p9auth
> +devices:
> +
> + majfile=/sys/module/p9auth/parameters/cap_major
> + minfile=/sys/module/p9auth/parameters/cap_minor
> + maj=`cat $majfile`
> + mknod /dev/caphash c $maj 0
> + min=`cat $minfile`
> + mknod /dev/capuse c $maj 1
> + chmod ugo+w /dev/capuse
That is incorrect, you don't need the cap_major/minor files at all, the
device node should be automatically created for you, right?
And do you really want to do all of this control through a device node?
Why?
> +DEFINE_MUTEX(cap_mutex); /* TODO fix up the locking one day */
One might hope that today would be that day...
Also, please run this through sparse. This is a variable that doesn't
need to be global.
> +struct cap_dev {
> + struct cdev cdev;
> +};
Do you really need to do it this way? A cdev for a single device node?
That's major overkill.
> +static int cap_major = CAP_MAJOR;
> +static int cap_minor;
Just always use a dynamic misc device, you never need a whole major for
this.
> +module_param(cap_major, int, S_IRUGO);
> +module_param(cap_minor, int, S_IRUGO);
Can be removed.
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Ashwin Ganti");
Hm, who is going to maintain this, you, or Ashwin?
> +static void hexdump(unsigned char *buf, unsigned int len)
> +{
> + while (len--)
> + printk(KERN_DEBUG "%02x", *buf++);
> + printk(KERN_DEBUG "\n");
> +}
We have a built-in function for this already.
Oh, this function is also incorrect, which is a good reason to use the
built-in ones.
I'm going to stop now, this doesn't belong in drivers/char/ yet, it
needs work...
thanks,
greg k-h
> +/*
> + * read an entry. For now it is
> + * source_user@target_user@rand
> + * Next it will become
> + * source_user@target_user@target_group@numgroups@grp1..@grpn@rand
> + */
Hm, wait, one more.... The kernel/user api is going to change some time
in the future? Please fix this now before it gets merged.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-21 3:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-21 1:27 [PATCH 1/3] p9auth: split core function out of some set*{u,g}id functions Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 1:28 ` [PATCH 2/3] p9auth: add CAP_GRANT_ID to authorize use of /dev/caphash Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 2:54 ` Greg KH
2010-04-21 1:29 ` [PATCH 3/3] p9auth: add p9auth driver Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 3:04 ` Greg KH [this message]
2010-04-21 3:45 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 4:18 ` Ashwin Ganti
2010-04-21 13:47 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 14:44 ` Ashwin Ganti
2010-04-21 4:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-04-21 13:21 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-24 3:36 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-24 16:25 ` ron minnich
2010-04-24 18:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-04-25 3:24 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 9:27 ` Alan Cox
2010-04-21 13:39 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 14:19 ` Alan Cox
2010-04-21 15:09 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 19:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-04-21 20:23 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-22 4:57 ` Kyle Moffett
2010-04-22 14:36 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 13:55 ` Eric Paris
2010-04-21 14:30 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 10:46 ` [PATCH 1/3] p9auth: split core function out of some set*{u,g}id functions David Howells
2010-04-21 13:40 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-04-21 10:49 ` [PATCH 3/3] p9auth: add p9auth driver David Howells
2010-04-21 13:40 ` Serge E. Hallyn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100421030406.GB10258@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ashwin.ganti@gmail.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=ericvh@gmail.com \
--cc=jt.beard@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morgan@kernel.org \
--cc=oleg@us.ibm.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=rminnich@gmail.com \
--cc=rsc@swtch.com \
--cc=serue@us.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®