Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] IMA: Check IMA policy flag
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     eric.snowberg@oracle.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
        mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@google.com,
        sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org
References: <20191204224131.3384-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
 <20191204224131.3384-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
 <1576017749.4579.40.camel@linux.ibm.com>
From:   Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
Message-ID: <6385347a-bc40-7717-f9ad-8ed7dd7fee51@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 15:29:49 -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: <1576017749.4579.40.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 12/10/19 2:42 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:

> Patch descriptions aren't suppose to be written as pseudo code.  Start
> with the current status and problem description.
> 
> For example, "process_buffer_measurement() may be called prior to IMA being initialized, which would result in a kernel panic.  This patch ..."
> 
> Mimi

I'll update the patch description in this one and in the other patches 
per your comments.

Are you done reviewing all the patches in this set?

Other than the one code change per your comment on "[PATCH v10 5/6]" 
there are no other code changes I need to make?
Just wanted to confirm.

	[PATCH v10 5/6] IMA: Add support to limit measuring keys
=> With the additional "uid" support this isn't necessarily true any
more.

thanks,
  -lakshmi