From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4251C432C0 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 02:09:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E3E620684 for ; Wed, 27 Nov 2019 02:09:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="faogmiWb" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726576AbfK0CJK (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:09:10 -0500 Received: from linux.microsoft.com ([13.77.154.182]:58922 "EHLO linux.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725940AbfK0CJK (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Nov 2019 21:09:10 -0500 Received: from [10.137.112.108] (unknown [131.107.174.108]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5534820B7185; Tue, 26 Nov 2019 18:09:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 5534820B7185 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1574820549; bh=Ie1xSJ1/5sqVUEbyENfv1rfOxps/a2dGL+tHgWZBWxM=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=faogmiWbIjF6VvlXYwKJvg/78V1MAfEHdbHLQ4AHo7/dp8pgxSMWgZiu4eUtS9UQI 6FBZZyYRMzTWbFqMQF+uBY4/poj9fatavTjRf+Hgd4Qwc3m/wa4zmboQmh4fhmYtRU X/BHeA+ZrJD6CHsRcTSmfTJnWl1HyLJ959RuHiNY= Subject: Re: [PATCH v0] IMA: Check IMA policy flag To: Mimi Zohar , eric.snowberg@oracle.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org References: <20191121171444.2797-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <5a43ec9d-af82-9a31-3546-76e8328ff213@linux.microsoft.com> <1574706618.4793.218.camel@linux.ibm.com> From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian Message-ID: <6b51b7ff-ac8b-7cd9-1d0c-1358eab0fb6f@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 18:09:09 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1574706618.4793.218.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On 11/25/19 10:30 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote: >> >> Please let me know if the above change would be accepted as a standalone >> patch (like the one in this patch), >> or, I should include this change as one of the patches in the "Key >> Measurement" patch set? > > As I'm not planning on sending a pull request this open window, so > that it doesn't get lost/forgotten, please include it as the first > patch in this patch set. > > Mimi > I have included the change to check ima_policy_flag in process_buffer_measurement() as the 1st patch (PATCH v9 1/6) in the updated patch set I posted today. thanks, -lakshmi