Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 23 May 2023 11:49:10 +0200
From:   Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     Alexander Mikhalitsyn <aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@canonical.com>,
        davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>,
        Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@0pointer.de>,
        Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/3] scm: add SO_PASSPIDFD and SCM_PIDFD
Message-ID: <20230523-flechten-ortsschild-e5724ecc4ed0@brauner>
References: <20230522132439.634031-1-aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@canonical.com>
 <20230522132439.634031-2-aleksandr.mikhalitsyn@canonical.com>
 <20230522133409.5c6e839a@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230522133409.5c6e839a@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 01:34:09PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 22 May 2023 15:24:37 +0200 Alexander Mikhalitsyn wrote:
> > v6:
> > 	- disable feature when CONFIG_UNIX=n/m (pidfd_prepare API is not exported to modules)
> 
> IMHO hiding the code under #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_UNRELATED) is
> surprising to the user and.. ugly?
> 
> Can we move scm_pidfd_recv() into a C source and export that?
> That should be less controversial than exporting pidfd_prepare()
> directly?

I really would like to avoid that because it will just mean that someone
else will abuse that function and then make an argument why we should
export the other function.

I think it would be ok if we required that unix support is built in
because it's not unprecedented either and we're not breaking anything.
Bpf has the same requirement:

  #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_UNIX) && defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL)
  struct bpf_unix_iter_state {
          struct seq_net_private p;
          unsigned int cur_sk;
          unsigned int end_sk;
          unsigned int max_sk;
          struct sock **batch;
          bool st_bucket_done;
  };

and

  #if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_UNIX) && defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) && defined(CONFIG_PROC_FS)
  DEFINE_BPF_ITER_FUNC(unix, struct bpf_iter_meta *meta,
                       struct unix_sock *unix_sk, uid_t uid)