On 26-May 22:08, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 06:33:34PM +0200, KP Singh wrote:

quoted

From: KP Singh <redacted>

Similar to bpf_local_storage for sockets, add local storage for inodes.
The life-cycle of storage is managed with the life-cycle of the inode.
i.e. the storage is destroyed along with the owning inode.

Since, the intention is to use this in LSM programs, the destruction is
done after security_inode_free in __destroy_inode.

NAK onbloating the inode structure.  Please find an out of line way
to store your information.

The other alternative is to use lbs_inode (security blobs) and we can
do this without adding fields to struct inode.

Here is a rough diff (only illustrative, won't apply cleanly) of the
changes needed to this patch:

 https://gist.github.com/sinkap/1d213d17fb82a5e8ffdc3f320ec37d79

Once tracing has gets a whitelist based access to inode storage, I
guess it, too, can use bpf_local_storage for inodes if CONFIG_BPF_LSM
is enabled. Does this sound reasonable to the BPF folks?

- KP