All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima_setup.sh: Fix check of signed policy requirement
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 13:51:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260128125157.GA35959@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <447d5d46a8ac3ed8a8283d87bd555459a2679495.camel@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Mimi,

> Hi Petr,

> On Tue, 2026-01-27 at 14:17 +0100, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > Hi Mimi, all,

> > > Kernel code in arch_get_ima_policy() depends also on
> > > CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY added in v5.0:
> > > d958083a8f640 ("x86/ima: define arch_get_ima_policy() for x86")

> > > Fixes: c38b528783 ("ima_{conditionals, policy}: Handle policy required to be signed")
> > > Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
> > > ---
> > > Hi Mimi, all,

> > > FYI I'd like to merge it this week to get it into LTP release.

> > > Kind regards,
> > > Petr

> > I dared to merge this to get it into upcoming LTP release (this/next week).

> I'm so sorry for the delay.

> Only if CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY IS configured, should check_need_signed_policy be
> set to true and the test skipped.  However, I'm seeing:

> tst_kconfig.c:531: TINFO: Constraint 'CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY' not satisfied!
> tst_kconfig.c:477: TINFO: Variables:
> tst_kconfig.c:495: TINFO:  CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY=n
> ima_conditionals 1 TCONF: Aborting due to unsuitable kernel config, see above!

> Instead it's requiring CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY to be enabled.

Thanks for the report. I'm sorry, I should have used tst_check_kconfigs binary
directly, I'll send a fix shortly.

Kind regards,
Petr

> Mimi


> > >  testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh | 3 ++-
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

> > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh
> > > index 1bce78d425..df0b8d1532 100644
> > > --- a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh
> > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh
> > > @@ -466,10 +466,11 @@ require_evmctl()
> > >  }

> > >  # 56dc986a6b20b ("ima: require signed IMA policy when UEFI secure boot is enabled") # v6.5-rc4
> > > +# d958083a8f640 ("x86/ima: define arch_get_ima_policy() for x86") # v5.0
> > >  check_need_signed_policy()
> > >  {
> > >  	tst_secureboot_enabled && tst_kvcmp -ge '6.5' && tst_require_kconfigs \
> > > -		'CONFIG_IMA_KEYRINGS_PERMIT_SIGNED_BY_BUILTIN_OR_SECONDARY'
> > > +		'CONFIG_IMA_KEYRINGS_PERMIT_SIGNED_BY_BUILTIN_OR_SECONDARY,CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY'
> > >  }

> > >  # loop device is needed to use only for tmpfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] ima_setup.sh: Fix check of signed policy requirement
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 13:51:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260128125157.GA35959@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <447d5d46a8ac3ed8a8283d87bd555459a2679495.camel@linux.ibm.com>

Hi Mimi,

> Hi Petr,

> On Tue, 2026-01-27 at 14:17 +0100, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > Hi Mimi, all,

> > > Kernel code in arch_get_ima_policy() depends also on
> > > CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY added in v5.0:
> > > d958083a8f640 ("x86/ima: define arch_get_ima_policy() for x86")

> > > Fixes: c38b528783 ("ima_{conditionals, policy}: Handle policy required to be signed")
> > > Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
> > > ---
> > > Hi Mimi, all,

> > > FYI I'd like to merge it this week to get it into LTP release.

> > > Kind regards,
> > > Petr

> > I dared to merge this to get it into upcoming LTP release (this/next week).

> I'm so sorry for the delay.

> Only if CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY IS configured, should check_need_signed_policy be
> set to true and the test skipped.  However, I'm seeing:

> tst_kconfig.c:531: TINFO: Constraint 'CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY' not satisfied!
> tst_kconfig.c:477: TINFO: Variables:
> tst_kconfig.c:495: TINFO:  CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY=n
> ima_conditionals 1 TCONF: Aborting due to unsuitable kernel config, see above!

> Instead it's requiring CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY to be enabled.

Thanks for the report. I'm sorry, I should have used tst_check_kconfigs binary
directly, I'll send a fix shortly.

Kind regards,
Petr

> Mimi


> > >  testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh | 3 ++-
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

> > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh
> > > index 1bce78d425..df0b8d1532 100644
> > > --- a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh
> > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_setup.sh
> > > @@ -466,10 +466,11 @@ require_evmctl()
> > >  }

> > >  # 56dc986a6b20b ("ima: require signed IMA policy when UEFI secure boot is enabled") # v6.5-rc4
> > > +# d958083a8f640 ("x86/ima: define arch_get_ima_policy() for x86") # v5.0
> > >  check_need_signed_policy()
> > >  {
> > >  	tst_secureboot_enabled && tst_kvcmp -ge '6.5' && tst_require_kconfigs \
> > > -		'CONFIG_IMA_KEYRINGS_PERMIT_SIGNED_BY_BUILTIN_OR_SECONDARY'
> > > +		'CONFIG_IMA_KEYRINGS_PERMIT_SIGNED_BY_BUILTIN_OR_SECONDARY,CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY'
> > >  }

> > >  # loop device is needed to use only for tmpfs

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

  reply	other threads:[~2026-01-28 12:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-21  8:33 [PATCH] ima_setup.sh: Fix check of signed policy requirement Petr Vorel
2026-01-21  8:33 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2026-01-27 13:17 ` Petr Vorel
2026-01-27 13:17   ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2026-01-27 18:24   ` Mimi Zohar
2026-01-27 18:24     ` [LTP] " Mimi Zohar
2026-01-28 12:51     ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2026-01-28 12:51       ` Petr Vorel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20260128125157.GA35959@pevik \
    --to=pvorel@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.