On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:35 PM Olga Kornievskaia
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 4:55 PM Paul Moore [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 10:45 AM Anna Schumaker
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 8:34 PM Paul Moore [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:53 PM Casey Schaufler [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 3/2/2021 10:20 AM, Anna Schumaker wrote:

quoted

Hi Casey,

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 10:40 PM Olga Kornievskaia
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Olga Kornievskaia <redacted>

Add a new hook that takes an existing super block and a new mount
with new options and determines if new options confict with an
existing mount or not.

A filesystem can use this new hook to determine if it can share
the an existing superblock with a new superblock for the new mount.

Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <redacted>

Do you have any other thoughts on this patch? I'm also wondering how
you want to handle sending it upstream.

James Morris is the maintainer for the security sub-system,
so you'll want to send this through him. He will want you to
have an ACK from Paul Moore, who is the SELinux maintainer.

In the past I've pulled patches such as this (new LSM hook, with only
a SELinux implementation of the new hook) in via the selinux/next tree
after the other LSMs have ACK'd the new hook.  This helps limit merge
problems with other SELinux changes and allows us (the SELinux folks)
to include it in the ongoing testing that we do during the -rcX
releases.

So Anna, if you or anyone else on the NFS side of the house want to
add your ACKs/REVIEWs/etc. please do so as I don't like merging
patches that cross subsystem boundaries without having all the
associated ACKs.  Casey, James, and other LSM folks please do the
same.

Sure:
Acked-by: Anna Schumaker <redacted>

Are you also going to take patch 3/3 that uses the new hook, or should
that go through the NFS tree? Patch 2/3 is a cleanup that can go
through the NFS tree.

Generally when patches are posted as patchsets I would apply the whole
patchset assuming they patches were all good, however it does seem
like patch 2/3 is not strictly related to the other two?  That said,
as long as your ACK applies to all three patches in the patchset I
have no problem applying all of them to the selinux/next tree once
some of the other LSM maintainers provide their ACKs (while there may
only a SELinux implementation of the hook at the moment, we need to
make sure the other LSMs are okay with the basic hook concept).

Also, did the v4 posting only include patch 1/3?  I see v3 postings
for the other two patches, but the only v4 patch I see is 1/3 ... ?

I didn't not repost patches that didn't change.

Okay, so I'm guessing that means path 2/3 and 3/3 didn't change?

While I suppose there are cases where people do not do this, it has
been my experience that if someone posts a patchset and some portion
of the patchset changes, due to feedback or other factors, the entire
patchset is reposted under the new version number.  If nothing else
this helps ensure people are always looking at the latest draft of a
particular patch instead of having to dig through the list to
determine which patch is the most recent.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com