Re: [PATCH v10 0/5] Introduce mseal

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 02:59:57PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 16:35:19 +0000 jeffxu@chromium.org wrote:
> >
> >> This patchset proposes a new mseal() syscall for the Linux kernel.
> >
> > I have not moved this into mm-stable for a 6.10 merge.  Mainly because
> > of the total lack of Reviewed-by:s and Acked-by:s.
> >
> > The code appears to be stable enough for a merge.
> >
> > It's awkward that we're in conference this week, but I ask people to
> > give consideration to the desirability of moving mseal() into mainline
> > sometime over the next week, please.
> 
> I hate to be obnoxious, but I *was* copied ... :)
> 
> Not taking a position on merging, but I have to ask: are we convinced at
> this point that mseal() isn't a chrome-only system call?  Did we ever
> see the glibc patches that were promised?

I think _this_ version of mseal() is OpenBSD's mimmutable() with a
basically unused extra 'flags' argument.  As such, we have an existance
proof that it's useful beyond Chrome.

I think Liam still had concerns around the
walk-the-vmas-twice-to-error-out-early part of the implementation?
Although we can always fix the implementation later; changing the API
is hard.