Skip to content

Add Linux LSM UAPI bindings - #191

Open
a-shannon wants to merge 1 commit into
sunfishcode:mainfrom
a-shannon:a-shannon/linux-lsm-uapi
Open

Add Linux LSM UAPI bindings#191
a-shannon wants to merge 1 commit into
sunfishcode:mainfrom
a-shannon:a-shannon/linux-lsm-uapi

Conversation

@a-shannon

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • Include <linux/lsm.h> for Linux 6.8 and later.
  • Generate lsm_ctx and the 23 LSM ID, attribute, and flag constants
    for all 20 supported architectures.
  • Keep the change within the existing general module.

The definitions match the Linux v6.17 UAPI.

Validation

  • An unchanged clang 22 baseline regenerates byte-clean.
  • Candidate regeneration is idempotent and strips exactly to the upstream base.
  • Feature/MSRV checks, the layout oracle, representative cross-target checks,
    and the applicable upstream target matrix pass.

Scope

This exposes raw UAPI definitions only. It does not add syscall wrappers,
detect active LSMs, parse returned records, establish buffer bounds, or claim
runtime kernel support.

Coordination

This is functionally separate from #186, #187, #190, and #182, but those pull
requests overlap generated outputs. I will rebase and regenerate if any of them
land first.

Include linux/lsm.h for Linux 6.8 and later so the general module exports lsm_ctx and the LSM ID, attribute, and flag constants on all 20 generated architectures.

This adds raw UAPI definitions only. It does not add syscall wrappers or runtime behavior.
@a-shannon
a-shannon marked this pull request as ready for review August 9, 2026 13:07
@a-shannon

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Hi @sunfishcode — this PR is now ready for review. GitHub Actions currently show no checks, presumably because this is a first-time fork contribution. When convenient, could you please approve the workflow run and review whether these Linux LSM UAPI bindings fit the existing general module? I am happy to adjust the patch if needed. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant