* [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error
@ 2013-02-24 15:15 Mimi Zohar
2013-02-24 18:29 ` David Rientjes
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mimi Zohar @ 2013-02-24 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Randy Dunlap, David Rientjes
Cc: James Morris, axboe, Dmitry Kasatkin, linux-security-module,
linux-next, linux-kernel
Fix a build error when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled, by defining
a wrapper called blk_part_pack_uuid(). The wrapper returns
-EINVAL, when CONFIG_BLOCK is not defined.
security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:538:4: error: implicit declaration
of function 'part_pack_uuid' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
Changleog v1:
- rename ima_part_pack_uuid() to blk_part_pack_uuid()
- resolve scripts/checkpatch.pl warnings
Changelog v0:
- fix UUID scripts/Lindent msgs
Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Reported-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
include/linux/genhd.h | 10 ++++++++++
security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 11 ++++++-----
2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/genhd.h b/include/linux/genhd.h
index 79b8bba..9f3c275 100644
--- a/include/linux/genhd.h
+++ b/include/linux/genhd.h
@@ -231,6 +231,12 @@ static inline void part_pack_uuid(const u8 *uuid_str, u8 *to)
}
}
+static inline int blk_part_pack_uuid(const u8 *uuid_str, u8 *to)
+{
+ part_pack_uuid(uuid_str, to);
+ return 0;
+}
+
static inline int disk_max_parts(struct gendisk *disk)
{
if (disk->flags & GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT)
@@ -718,6 +724,10 @@ static inline dev_t blk_lookup_devt(const char *name, int partno)
return devt;
}
+static inline int blk_part_pack_uuid(const u8 *uuid_str, u8 *to)
+{
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
#endif /* CONFIG_BLOCK */
#endif /* _LINUX_GENHD_H */
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index b27535a..399433a 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule,
&& rule->fsmagic != inode->i_sb->s_magic)
return false;
if ((rule->flags & IMA_FSUUID) &&
- memcmp(rule->fsuuid, inode->i_sb->s_uuid, sizeof(rule->fsuuid)))
+ memcmp(rule->fsuuid, inode->i_sb->s_uuid, sizeof(rule->fsuuid)))
return false;
if ((rule->flags & IMA_UID) && !uid_eq(rule->uid, cred->uid))
return false;
@@ -530,14 +530,15 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
ima_log_string(ab, "fsuuid", args[0].from);
if (memchr_inv(entry->fsuuid, 0x00,
- sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
+ sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
result = -EINVAL;
break;
}
- part_pack_uuid(args[0].from, entry->fsuuid);
- entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
- result = 0;
+ result = blk_part_pack_uuid(args[0].from,
+ entry->fsuuid);
+ if (!result)
+ entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
break;
case Opt_uid:
ima_log_string(ab, "uid", args[0].from);
--
1.8.1.rc3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error
2013-02-24 15:15 [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error Mimi Zohar
@ 2013-02-24 18:29 ` David Rientjes
2013-02-24 20:28 ` Randy Dunlap
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Rientjes @ 2013-02-24 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mimi Zohar
Cc: Randy Dunlap, James Morris, axboe, Dmitry Kasatkin,
linux-security-module, linux-next, linux-kernel
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Fix a build error when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled, by defining
> a wrapper called blk_part_pack_uuid(). The wrapper returns
> -EINVAL, when CONFIG_BLOCK is not defined.
>
> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:538:4: error: implicit declaration
> of function 'part_pack_uuid' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>
> Changleog v1:
> - rename ima_part_pack_uuid() to blk_part_pack_uuid()
> - resolve scripts/checkpatch.pl warnings
> Changelog v0:
> - fix UUID scripts/Lindent msgs
>
> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> Reported-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error
2013-02-24 15:15 [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error Mimi Zohar
2013-02-24 18:29 ` David Rientjes
@ 2013-02-24 20:28 ` Randy Dunlap
2013-02-25 2:59 ` James Morris
2013-02-25 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Randy Dunlap @ 2013-02-24 20:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mimi Zohar
Cc: David Rientjes, James Morris, axboe, Dmitry Kasatkin,
linux-security-module, linux-next, linux-kernel
On 02/24/13 07:15, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Fix a build error when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled, by defining
> a wrapper called blk_part_pack_uuid(). The wrapper returns
> -EINVAL, when CONFIG_BLOCK is not defined.
>
> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:538:4: error: implicit declaration
> of function 'part_pack_uuid' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>
> Changleog v1:
> - rename ima_part_pack_uuid() to blk_part_pack_uuid()
> - resolve scripts/checkpatch.pl warnings
> Changelog v0:
> - fix UUID scripts/Lindent msgs
>
> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
> Reported-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Thanks.
> ---
> include/linux/genhd.h | 10 ++++++++++
> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/genhd.h b/include/linux/genhd.h
> index 79b8bba..9f3c275 100644
> --- a/include/linux/genhd.h
> +++ b/include/linux/genhd.h
> @@ -231,6 +231,12 @@ static inline void part_pack_uuid(const u8 *uuid_str, u8 *to)
> }
> }
>
> +static inline int blk_part_pack_uuid(const u8 *uuid_str, u8 *to)
> +{
> + part_pack_uuid(uuid_str, to);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static inline int disk_max_parts(struct gendisk *disk)
> {
> if (disk->flags & GENHD_FL_EXT_DEVT)
> @@ -718,6 +724,10 @@ static inline dev_t blk_lookup_devt(const char *name, int partno)
> return devt;
> }
>
> +static inline int blk_part_pack_uuid(const u8 *uuid_str, u8 *to)
> +{
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> #endif /* CONFIG_BLOCK */
>
> #endif /* _LINUX_GENHD_H */
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index b27535a..399433a 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule,
> && rule->fsmagic != inode->i_sb->s_magic)
> return false;
> if ((rule->flags & IMA_FSUUID) &&
> - memcmp(rule->fsuuid, inode->i_sb->s_uuid, sizeof(rule->fsuuid)))
> + memcmp(rule->fsuuid, inode->i_sb->s_uuid, sizeof(rule->fsuuid)))
> return false;
> if ((rule->flags & IMA_UID) && !uid_eq(rule->uid, cred->uid))
> return false;
> @@ -530,14 +530,15 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
> ima_log_string(ab, "fsuuid", args[0].from);
>
> if (memchr_inv(entry->fsuuid, 0x00,
> - sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
> + sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
> result = -EINVAL;
> break;
> }
>
> - part_pack_uuid(args[0].from, entry->fsuuid);
> - entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
> - result = 0;
> + result = blk_part_pack_uuid(args[0].from,
> + entry->fsuuid);
> + if (!result)
> + entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
> break;
> case Opt_uid:
> ima_log_string(ab, "uid", args[0].from);
>
--
~Randy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error
2013-02-24 15:15 [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error Mimi Zohar
2013-02-24 18:29 ` David Rientjes
2013-02-24 20:28 ` Randy Dunlap
@ 2013-02-25 2:59 ` James Morris
2013-02-25 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: James Morris @ 2013-02-25 2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mimi Zohar
Cc: Randy Dunlap, David Rientjes, axboe, Dmitry Kasatkin,
linux-security-module, linux-next, linux-kernel
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Fix a build error when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled, by defining
> a wrapper called blk_part_pack_uuid(). The wrapper returns
> -EINVAL, when CONFIG_BLOCK is not defined.
Please indicate which tree your patches are intended for, also noting
specific regression details if any (e.g. which commit introduced it).
--
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error
2013-02-24 15:15 [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error Mimi Zohar
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-02-25 2:59 ` James Morris
@ 2013-02-25 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-25 23:18 ` Andrew Morton
3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2013-02-25 23:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mimi Zohar
Cc: Randy Dunlap, David Rientjes, James Morris, axboe,
Dmitry Kasatkin, linux-security-module, linux-next, linux-kernel
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 10:15:44 -0500
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Fix a build error when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled, by defining
> a wrapper called blk_part_pack_uuid(). The wrapper returns
> -EINVAL, when CONFIG_BLOCK is not defined.
>
> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:538:4: error: implicit declaration
> of function 'part_pack_uuid' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>
> ...
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index b27535a..399433a 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> ima_log_string(ab, "fsuuid", args[0].from);
>
> if (memchr_inv(entry->fsuuid, 0x00,
> - sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
> + sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
> result = -EINVAL;
> break;
> }
>
> - part_pack_uuid(args[0].from, entry->fsuuid);
> - entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
> - result = 0;
> + result = blk_part_pack_uuid(args[0].from,
> + entry->fsuuid);
> + if (!result)
> + entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
This will cause ima_parse_rule() to newly return -EINVAL if the fsuuid=
option is used when CONFIG_BLOCK=n.
This functional change was not changelogged, forcing me to ask: was it
deliberate or was it accidental?
And it is a non-back-compatible change, introducing some potential to
break existing userspace code. Is the risk considered acceptable? If
so, why?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error
2013-02-25 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2013-02-25 23:18 ` Andrew Morton
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2013-02-25 23:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mimi Zohar, Randy Dunlap, David Rientjes, James Morris, axboe,
Dmitry Kasatkin, linux-security-module, linux-next, linux-kernel
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:16:38 -0800
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 10:15:44 -0500
> Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Fix a build error when CONFIG_BLOCK is not enabled, by defining
> > a wrapper called blk_part_pack_uuid(). The wrapper returns
> > -EINVAL, when CONFIG_BLOCK is not defined.
> >
> > security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:538:4: error: implicit declaration
> > of function 'part_pack_uuid' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> >
> > ...
> >
> > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> > index b27535a..399433a 100644
> > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> > ima_log_string(ab, "fsuuid", args[0].from);
> >
> > if (memchr_inv(entry->fsuuid, 0x00,
> > - sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
> > + sizeof(entry->fsuuid))) {
> > result = -EINVAL;
> > break;
> > }
> >
> > - part_pack_uuid(args[0].from, entry->fsuuid);
> > - entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
> > - result = 0;
> > + result = blk_part_pack_uuid(args[0].from,
> > + entry->fsuuid);
> > + if (!result)
> > + entry->flags |= IMA_FSUUID;
>
> This will cause ima_parse_rule() to newly return -EINVAL if the fsuuid=
> option is used when CONFIG_BLOCK=n.
>
> This functional change was not changelogged, forcing me to ask: was it
> deliberate or was it accidental?
>
> And it is a non-back-compatible change, introducing some potential to
> break existing userspace code. Is the risk considered acceptable? If
> so, why?
ah, I see that the fsuuid stuff is new in 3.9, so there are no issues.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-02-25 23:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-02-24 15:15 [PATCH] block: fix part_pack_uuid() build error Mimi Zohar
2013-02-24 18:29 ` David Rientjes
2013-02-24 20:28 ` Randy Dunlap
2013-02-25 2:59 ` James Morris
2013-02-25 23:16 ` Andrew Morton
2013-02-25 23:18 ` Andrew Morton
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox