Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Mon, 11 Dec 2023 19:03:04 -0800
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Luis Henriques <lhenriques@suse.de>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] keys: flush work when accessing /proc/key-users
Message-ID: <20231212030304.GA39443@sol.localdomain>
References: <20231207024323.GA1994@sol.localdomain>
 <20231206145744.17277-1-lhenriques@suse.de>
 <498294.1701878642@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <87bkb3z047.fsf@suse.de>
 <2744563.1702303367@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2744563.1702303367@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 02:02:47PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > If there was a function that fully and synchronously releases a key's quota,
> > fs/crypto/ could call it before unlinking the key.  key_payload_reserve(key,
> > 0) almost does the trick, but it would release the key's bytes, not the key
> > itself.
> 
> Umm...  The point of the quota is that the key is occupying unswappable kernel
> memory (partly true in the case of big_key) and we need to limit that.
> Further, the key is not released until it is unlinked.

Well, fs/crypto/ no longer uses the keyrings subsystem for the actual keys, as
that was far too broken.  It just ties into the quota now.  So what's needed is
a way to release quota synchronously.

That might just mean not using the keyrings subsystem at all anymore.

> Do we need faster disposal of keys?  Perhaps keeping a list of keys that need
> destroying rather than scanning the entire key set for them.  We still need to
> scan non-destroyed keyrings, though, to find the pointers to defunct keys
> unless I have some sort of backpointer list.

If it's still asynchronous, that doesn't solve the problem.

- Eric