| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <f9ca33c7-2f96-ce1f-4fd2-587b991f2e85@embeddedor.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 21:47:00 -0600
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] security: mark expected switch fall-throughs
On 1/24/19 9:29 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>
>
> On 1/24/19 9:13 PM, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 1/24/2019 6:56 PM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch
>>> cases where we are expecting to fall through.
>>>
>>> This patch fixes the following warnings:
>>>
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c:116:26: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c:85:10: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:940:18: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:943:7: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:972:21: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:974:7: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/smack/smack_lsm.c:3391:9: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>> security/apparmor/domain.c:569:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=]
>>>
>>> Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3
>>>
>>> This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
>>
BTW, thanks, Casey. I'll take this in my tree.
--
Gustavo
>> Ug. It can't be part of a greater comment? Grumble.
>>
>
> Not like the one in this case.
>
> It can be part of a one line comment like this:
>
> /* fall through - ... */
>
> and it has to be placed at the bottom of the case.
>
> I know... I'd be great if this can be improved.
>
>>> ---
>>> security/apparmor/domain.c | 2 +-
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c | 1 +
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 4 ++++
>>> security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c | 1 +
>>> security/smack/smack_lsm.c | 3 +--
>>> 5 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/security/apparmor/domain.c b/security/apparmor/domain.c
>>> index 726910bba84b..c7c619578095 100644
>>> --- a/security/apparmor/domain.c
>>> +++ b/security/apparmor/domain.c
>>> @@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ static struct aa_label *x_to_label(struct aa_profile *profile,
>>> stack = NULL;
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> - /* fall through to X_NAME */
>>> + /* fall through - to X_NAME */
>>> case AA_X_NAME:
>>> if (xindex & AA_X_CHILD)
>>> /* released by caller */
>>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
>>> index a2baa85ea2f5..57daf30fb7d4 100644
>>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
>>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
>>> @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ static void ima_set_cache_status(struct integrity_iint_cache *iint,
>>> break;
>>> case CREDS_CHECK:
>>> iint->ima_creds_status = status;
>>> + /* fall through */
>>> case FILE_CHECK:
>>> case POST_SETATTR:
>>> iint->ima_file_status = status;
>>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>> index 8bc8a1c8cb3f..122797023bdb 100644
>>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>> @@ -938,10 +938,12 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
>>> case Opt_uid_gt:
>>> case Opt_euid_gt:
>>> entry->uid_op = &uid_gt;
>>> + /* fall through */
>>> case Opt_uid_lt:
>>> case Opt_euid_lt:
>>> if ((token == Opt_uid_lt) || (token == Opt_euid_lt))
>>> entry->uid_op = &uid_lt;
>>> + /* fall through */
>>> case Opt_uid_eq:
>>> case Opt_euid_eq:
>>> uid_token = (token == Opt_uid_eq) ||
>>> @@ -970,9 +972,11 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
>>> break;
>>> case Opt_fowner_gt:
>>> entry->fowner_op = &uid_gt;
>>> + /* fall through */
>>> case Opt_fowner_lt:
>>> if (token == Opt_fowner_lt)
>>> entry->fowner_op = &uid_lt;
>>> + /* fall through */
>>> case Opt_fowner_eq:
>>> ima_log_string_op(ab, "fowner", args[0].from,
>>> entry->fowner_op);
>>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c
>>> index 43752002c222..513b457ae900 100644
>>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c
>>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c
>>> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ static void ima_show_template_data_ascii(struct seq_file *m,
>>> /* skip ':' and '\0' */
>>> buf_ptr += 2;
>>> buflen -= buf_ptr - field_data->data;
>>> + /* fall through */
>>> case DATA_FMT_DIGEST:
>>> case DATA_FMT_HEX:
>>> if (!buflen)
>>> diff --git a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
>>> index fa98394a40d0..127aa6c58e34 100644
>>> --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
>>> +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
>>> @@ -3391,13 +3391,12 @@ static void smack_d_instantiate(struct dentry *opt_dentry, struct inode *inode)
>>> */
>>> final = &smack_known_star;
>>> /*
>>> - * Fall through.
>>> - *
>>> * If a smack value has been set we want to use it,
>>> * but since tmpfs isn't giving us the opportunity
>>> * to set mount options simulate setting the
>>> * superblock default.
>>> */
>>> + /* Fall through */
>>> default:
>>> /*
>>> * This isn't an understood special case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists