From: Nayna <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Donnellan <ajd@linux.ibm.com>,
Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
Dov Murik <dovmurik@linux.ibm.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
George Wilson <gcwilson@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] fs: define a firmware security filesystem named fwsecurityfs
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:34:44 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <84ddfea2-c2b7-6e84-718d-739ff00e957e@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88111914afc6204b2a3fb82ded5d9bfb6420bca6.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
On 11/20/22 22:14, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 17:13 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2022 at 01:20:09AM -0500, Nayna wrote:
>>> On 11/17/22 16:27, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 06:03:43PM -0500, Nayna wrote:
>>>>> On 11/10/22 04:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> [...]
>>>
[...]
>>> You are correct. There's no namespace for these.
>> So again, I do not understand. Do you want to use filesystem
>> namespaces, or do you not?
> Since this seems to go back to my email quoted again, let me repeat:
> the question isn't if this patch is namespaced; I think you've agreed
> several times it isn't. The question is if the exposed properties
> would ever need to be namespaced. This is a subtle and complex
> question which isn't at all explored by the above interchange.
>
>> How again can you not use sysfs or securityfs due to namespaces?
>> What is missing?
> I already explained in the email that sysfs contains APIs like
> simple_pin_... which are completely inimical to namespacing. Currently
> securityfs contains them as well, so in that regard they're both no
> better than each other. The point I was making is that securityfs is
> getting namespaced by the IMA namespace rework (which is pretty complex
> due to having to replace the simple_pin_... APIs), so when (perhaps if)
> the IMA namespace is accepted, securityfs will make a good home for
> quantities that need namespacing. That's not to say you can't
> namespace things in sysfs, you can, in the same way that you can get a
> round peg into a square hole if you bang hard enough.
>
> So perhaps we could get back to the original question of whether these
> quantities would ever be namespaced ... or, conversely, whether they
> would never need namespacing.
To clarify, I brought up in the discussion about namespacing
considerations because I was asked about them. However, I determined
there were none because firmware object interactions are invariant
across namespaces. I don't see this changing in the future given that
the firmware objects have no notion of namespacing.
Thanks & Regards,
- Nayna
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-21 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-06 21:07 [PATCH 0/4] powerpc/pseries: expose firmware security variables via filesystem Nayna Jain
2022-11-06 21:07 ` [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/pseries: Add new functions to PLPKS driver Nayna Jain
2022-11-06 21:07 ` [PATCH 2/4] fs: define a firmware security filesystem named fwsecurityfs Nayna Jain
2022-11-07 9:35 ` kernel test robot
2022-11-09 13:46 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-09 20:10 ` Nayna
2022-11-10 9:58 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-14 23:03 ` Nayna
2022-11-17 21:27 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-19 6:20 ` Nayna
2022-11-20 16:13 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-21 3:14 ` James Bottomley
2022-11-21 11:05 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-21 14:03 ` James Bottomley
2022-11-21 15:05 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-21 17:33 ` James Bottomley
2022-11-21 18:12 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-21 16:12 ` David Laight
2022-11-21 19:34 ` Nayna [this message]
2022-11-19 11:48 ` Ritesh Harjani (IBM)
2022-11-22 23:21 ` Nayna
2022-11-23 15:05 ` Nayna
2022-11-23 15:57 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-23 18:57 ` Nayna
2022-12-12 0:58 ` Andrew Donnellan
2022-12-12 6:11 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-11-06 21:07 ` [PATCH 3/4] powerpc/pseries: initialize fwsecurityfs with plpks arch-specific structure Nayna Jain
2022-11-07 3:52 ` kernel test robot
2022-11-06 21:07 ` [PATCH 4/4] powerpc/pseries: expose authenticated variables stored in LPAR PKS Nayna Jain
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=84ddfea2-c2b7-6e84-718d-739ff00e957e@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dovmurik@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gcwilson@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=stefanb@linux.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).