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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 20 Feb 2019 11:05:32 +0100
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Zhangshaokun <zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 20

On Wed, 20 Feb 2019 at 10:58, Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:52:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 05:11:15PM +0800, Zhangshaokun wrote:
> > > There is a compiler failure on arm64 platform, as follow:
> > >
> > >   AS      arch/arm64/kvm/hyp.o
> > >   CC      kernel/trace/ring_buffer.o
> > > In file included from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:0:
> > > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:176:7: error: redeclaration of enumerator ‘NONE’
> > >   hook(NONE)   \
> > >        ^
> > > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:188:34: note: in definition of macro ‘__ima_hook_enumify’
> > >  #define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
> > >                                   ^
> > > security/integrity/ima/ima.h:191:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__ima_hooks’
> > >   __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
> > >   ^
> > > In file included from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/acpi.h:15:0,
> > >                  from ./include/acpi/acpi_io.h:7,
> > >                  from ./include/linux/acpi.h:47,
> > >                  from ./include/linux/tpm.h:26,
> > >                  from security/integrity/ima/ima.h:25,
> > >                  from security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c:30:
> > > ./include/linux/efi.h:1716:2: note: previous definition of ‘NONE’ was here
> > >   NONE,
> > >   ^
> > > scripts/Makefile.build:276: recipe for target 'security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o' failed
> > > make[3]: *** [security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.o] Error 1
> > >
> > > I dug it and it is the commit 901615cb916d ("tpm: move tpm_chip definition to include/linux/tpm.h")
> >
> > This results from a new include in tpm.h:
> >
> >   #include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> > Must be fixed either in include/linux/efi.h or security/integrity/ima.h as
> > those files have a name collision. Makes me wonder why neither has taken
> > care of prefixing the constants properly.
>
> Preferably both subsystems should be fixed with proper 'EFI_' and 'IMA_'
> prefixes. Defining a constant named as NONE in a non-generic subsystem
> (e.g. not part of the core data structures of Linux) and especially
> exporting it to include/linux is not too well considered act.
>

Fixes for this have already been proposed, and should appear in -next shortly

The EFI one is here
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#label/linux-efi/FMfcgxwBVgrQRjglPkWRqRqVclGgVDnB

Not sure about the IMA one, Mimi should be able to comment ...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists