linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the integrity tree

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210223110035.54ca2a0c@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Tue, 23 Feb 2021 11:00:35 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>
Cc:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pidfd tree with the integrity
 tree

Hi all,

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 08:07:17 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 17:18:18 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > 
> > Today's linux-next merge of the pidfd tree got a conflict in:
> > 
> >   security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
> > 
> > between commit:
> > 
> >   2b4a2474a202 ("IMA: generalize keyring specific measurement constructs")
> > 
> > from the integrity tree and commit:
> > 
> >   a2d2329e30e2 ("ima: handle idmapped mounts")
> > 
> > from the pidfd tree.
> > 
> > I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> > is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> > conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> > is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> > with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> > complex conflicts.
> > 
> > diff --cc security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
> > index 1dd70dc68ffd,ed410efb3597..000000000000
> > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
> > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c
> > @@@ -183,17 -184,18 +184,18 @@@ err_out
> >    * Returns IMA_MEASURE, IMA_APPRAISE mask.
> >    *
> >    */
> > - int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid,
> > - 		   int mask, enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr,
> > + int ima_get_action(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, struct inode *inode,
> > + 		   const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, int mask,
> > + 		   enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr,
> >   		   struct ima_template_desc **template_desc,
> >  -		   const char *keyring)
> >  +		   const char *func_data)
> >   {
> >   	int flags = IMA_MEASURE | IMA_AUDIT | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_HASH;
> >   
> >   	flags &= ima_policy_flag;
> >   
> > - 	return ima_match_policy(inode, cred, secid, func, mask, flags, pcr,
> > - 				template_desc, func_data);
> > + 	return ima_match_policy(mnt_userns, inode, cred, secid, func, mask,
> >  -				flags, pcr, template_desc, keyring);
> > ++				flags, pcr, template_desc, func_data);
> >   }
> >   
> >   /*  
> 
> With the merge window about to open, this is a reminder that this
> conflict still exists.

This is now a conflict between the pidfd tree and Linus' tree.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped