From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mimi Zohar Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/9] ima: make process_buffer_measurement() non static Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 18:04:43 -0400 Message-ID: <1570053883.4421.77.camel@linux.ibm.com> References: <1569594360-7141-1-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com> <1569594360-7141-7-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1569594360-7141-7-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nayna Jain , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michael Ellerman , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Ard Biesheuvel , Jeremy Kerr , Matthew Garret , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Claudio Carvalho , George Wilson , Elaine Palmer , Eric Ricther , Oliver O'Halloran , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Prakhar Srivastava List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org [Cc'ing Prakhar] On Fri, 2019-09-27 at 10:25 -0400, Nayna Jain wrote: > To add the support for checking against blacklist, it would be needed > to add an additional measurement record that identifies the record > as blacklisted. > > This patch modifies the process_buffer_measurement() and makes it > non static to be used by blacklist functionality. It modifies the > function to handle more than just the KEXEC_CMDLINE. > > Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain Making process_buffer_measurement() non static is the end result, not the reason for the change.  The reason for changing process_buffer_measurement() is to make it more generic.  The blacklist measurement record is the usecase. Please rewrite the patch description. thanks, Mimi