From: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the security-testing tree
Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 17:04:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C575D0C.9080203@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100802121601.363af4a9.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
On 08/01/2010 07:16 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> After merging the security-testing tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> allmodconfig) failed like this (also some warnings ...):
>
> security/apparmor/ipc.c: In function 'aa_ptrace':
> security/apparmor/ipc.c:103: warning: initialization discards qualifiers from pointer target type
> security/apparmor/domain.c: In function 'may_change_ptraced_domain':
> security/apparmor/domain.c:73: warning: assignment discards qualifiers from pointer target type
> security/apparmor/lsm.c:701: error: 'param_ops_aabool' undeclared here (not in a function)
> security/apparmor/lsm.c:721: error: 'param_ops_aalockpolicy' undeclared here (not in a function)
> security/apparmor/lsm.c:729: error: 'param_ops_aauint' undeclared here (not in a function)
>
> Error caused by commit e0500000b50a50ec8cc9967001f3ed201b83cb36
> ("AppArmor: LSM interface, and security module initialization")
> interacting with commit 0685652df0929cec7d78efa85127f6eb34962132
> ("param:param_ops") from the rr tree.
>
> I applied the following merge fix patch:
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:00:43 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] AppArmor: update for module_param_named API change
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
looks good, thanks Stephen
Signed-off-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
> ---
> security/apparmor/lsm.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/apparmor/lsm.c b/security/apparmor/lsm.c
> index 8db33a8..d5666d3 100644
> --- a/security/apparmor/lsm.c
> +++ b/security/apparmor/lsm.c
> @@ -667,17 +667,29 @@ static struct security_operations apparmor_ops = {
> * AppArmor sysfs module parameters
> */
>
> -static int param_set_aabool(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp);
> -static int param_get_aabool(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp);
> +static int param_set_aabool(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp);
> +static int param_get_aabool(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp);
> #define param_check_aabool(name, p) __param_check(name, p, int)
> +static struct kernel_param_ops param_ops_aabool = {
> + .set = param_set_aabool,
> + .get = param_get_aabool
> +};
>
> -static int param_set_aauint(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp);
> -static int param_get_aauint(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp);
> +static int param_set_aauint(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp);
> +static int param_get_aauint(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp);
> #define param_check_aauint(name, p) __param_check(name, p, int)
> +static struct kernel_param_ops param_ops_aauint = {
> + .set = param_set_aauint,
> + .get = param_get_aauint
> +};
>
> -static int param_set_aalockpolicy(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp);
> -static int param_get_aalockpolicy(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp);
> +static int param_set_aalockpolicy(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp);
> +static int param_get_aalockpolicy(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp);
> #define param_check_aalockpolicy(name, p) __param_check(name, p, int)
> +static struct kernel_param_ops param_ops_aalockpolicy = {
> + .set = param_set_aalockpolicy,
> + .get = param_get_aalockpolicy
> +};
>
> static int param_set_audit(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp);
> static int param_get_audit(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp);
> @@ -751,7 +763,7 @@ static int __init apparmor_enabled_setup(char *str)
> __setup("apparmor=", apparmor_enabled_setup);
>
> /* set global flag turning off the ability to load policy */
> -static int param_set_aalockpolicy(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp)
> +static int param_set_aalockpolicy(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (!capable(CAP_MAC_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
> @@ -760,35 +772,35 @@ static int param_set_aalockpolicy(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp)
> return param_set_bool(val, kp);
> }
>
> -static int param_get_aalockpolicy(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp)
> +static int param_get_aalockpolicy(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (!capable(CAP_MAC_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
> return param_get_bool(buffer, kp);
> }
>
> -static int param_set_aabool(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp)
> +static int param_set_aabool(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (!capable(CAP_MAC_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
> return param_set_bool(val, kp);
> }
>
> -static int param_get_aabool(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp)
> +static int param_get_aabool(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (!capable(CAP_MAC_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
> return param_get_bool(buffer, kp);
> }
>
> -static int param_set_aauint(const char *val, struct kernel_param *kp)
> +static int param_set_aauint(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (!capable(CAP_MAC_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
> return param_set_uint(val, kp);
> }
>
> -static int param_get_aauint(char *buffer, struct kernel_param *kp)
> +static int param_get_aauint(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> {
> if (!capable(CAP_MAC_ADMIN))
> return -EPERM;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-03 0:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-02 2:16 linux-next: build failure after merge of the security-testing tree Stephen Rothwell
2010-08-03 0:04 ` John Johansen [this message]
2010-08-05 1:37 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-08-03 2:40 ` linux-next: Fix AppArmor build warnings " John Johansen
2010-08-18 0:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-08-18 1:00 ` Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-08-12 2:47 linux-next: build failure " Stephen Rothwell
2011-08-15 4:04 ` Stephen Rothwell
2011-08-10 0:58 Stephen Rothwell
2011-08-10 1:48 ` Mimi Zohar
2011-08-10 7:21 ` James Morris
2011-06-29 3:48 Stephen Rothwell
2011-06-29 4:16 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-06-29 7:36 ` James Morris
2010-10-19 3:57 Stephen Rothwell
2010-10-19 4:09 ` Eric Paris
2010-07-30 2:06 Stephen Rothwell
2010-07-30 3:54 ` James Morris
2010-07-30 6:01 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-07-30 7:31 ` John Johansen
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=4C575D0C.9080203@canonical.com \
--to=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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.