Message-ID: <e0e704761d5929f73e5e53ac99cd4935ea268cc5.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 13/17] KEYS: link secondary_trusted_keys to machine
 trusted keys
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com,
        dwmw2@infradead.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
        davem@davemloft.net, jarkko@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
        serge@hallyn.com
Cc:     keescook@chromium.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        weiyongjun1@huawei.com, nayna@linux.ibm.com, ebiggers@google.com,
        ardb@kernel.org, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, lszubowi@redhat.com,
        jason@zx2c4.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, pjones@redhat.com,
        konrad.wilk@oracle.com
Date:   Thu, 18 Nov 2021 07:32:31 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20211116001545.2639333-14-eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
References: <20211116001545.2639333-1-eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
         <20211116001545.2639333-14-eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Eric,

Is the subject line left over from the original patch?   Shouldn't it
be "link machine trusted keys to secondary_trusted_keys".

On Mon, 2021-11-15 at 19:15 -0500, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> Allow the .machine keyring to be linked to the secondary_trusted_keys.
> After the link is created, keys contained in the .machine keyring will
> automatically be searched when searching secondary_trusted_keys.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
> ---
> v3: Initial version
> v4: Unmodified from v3
> v5: Rename to machine keyring
> v7: Unmodified from v5
> ---
>  certs/system_keyring.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/certs/system_keyring.c b/certs/system_keyring.c
> index ba732856ebd0..2a2dc70b126c 100644
> --- a/certs/system_keyring.c
> +++ b/certs/system_keyring.c
> @@ -101,6 +101,9 @@ static __init struct key_restriction *get_secondary_restriction(void)
>  void __init set_machine_trusted_keys(struct key *keyring)
>  {
>  	machine_trusted_keys = keyring;
> +
> +	if (key_link(secondary_trusted_keys, machine_trusted_keys) < 0)
> +		panic("Can't link (machine) trusted keyrings\n");
>  }
>  
>  /**

In general is the ordering of the patches "bisect safe"[1]?  Only in
the next patch is machine_trusted_keys set.   In this case, either
merge the two patches or reverse their order.

thanks,

Mimi

[1] Refer to the section "Separate your changes" in
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.