linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the apparmor tree with the security 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: <CAHC9VhR0csviPvHfh5CYm76PVz8LaAaAt38oRv+3gbFHEJP0yw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Nov 2022 13:51:43 -0500
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the apparmor tree with the security tree

On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 10:27 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the apparmor tree got a conflict in:
>
>   security/apparmor/domain.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   f6fbd8cbf3ed ("lsm,fs: fix vfs_getxattr_alloc() return type and caller error paths")
>
> from the security tree and commit:
>
>   217af7e2f4de ("apparmor: refactor profile rules and attachments")
>
> from the apparmor 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.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc security/apparmor/domain.c
> index 00dc0ec066de,b447bc13ea8e..000000000000
> --- a/security/apparmor/domain.c
> +++ b/security/apparmor/domain.c
> @@@ -308,14 -296,16 +296,15 @@@ static int change_profile_perms(struct
>    * Returns: number of extended attributes that matched, or < 0 on error
>    */
>   static int aa_xattrs_match(const struct linux_binprm *bprm,
> -                          struct aa_profile *profile, unsigned int state)
> +                          struct aa_profile *profile, aa_state_t state)
>   {
>         int i;
>  -      ssize_t size;
>         struct dentry *d;
>         char *value = NULL;
> -       int size, value_size = 0, ret = profile->xattr_count;
> +       struct aa_attachment *attach = &profile->attach;
>  -      int value_size = 0, ret = attach->xattr_count;
> ++      int size, value_size = 0, ret = attach->xattr_count;
>
> -       if (!bprm || !profile->xattr_count)
> +       if (!bprm || !attach->xattr_count)
>                 return 0;
>         might_sleep();

John's the AppArmor expert, but this looks okay to me.  As a reminder,
the lsm/next commit only changes the type of @size from a ssize_t to
an int type.

-- 
paul-moore.com