Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] ima: Remove unused build_ima_appraise variable
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com,
        silviu.vlasceanu@huawei.com
Date:   Wed, 22 Apr 2020 18:59:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20200325161455.7610-2-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
References: <20200325161116.7082-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
         <20200325161455.7610-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
         <20200325161455.7610-2-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <1587596384.5165.31.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Roberto, Krzysztof,

On Wed, 2020-03-25 at 17:14 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> From: Krzysztof Struczynski <krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com>
> 
> After adding the new add_rule() function in commit c52657d93b05
> ("ima: refactor ima_init_policy()"), all appraisal flags are added to the
> temp_ima_appraise variable. Remove build_ima_appraise that is not set
> anymore.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Struczynski <krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com>
> ---
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index ea9b991f0232..fcc26bddd7fc 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -48,7 +48,6 @@
>  
>  int ima_policy_flag;
>  static int temp_ima_appraise;
> -static int build_ima_appraise __ro_after_init;
>  
>  #define MAX_LSM_RULES 6
>  enum lsm_rule_types { LSM_OBJ_USER, LSM_OBJ_ROLE, LSM_OBJ_TYPE,
> @@ -606,7 +605,7 @@ void ima_update_policy_flag(void)
>  			ima_policy_flag |= entry->action;
>  	}
>  
> -	ima_appraise |= (build_ima_appraise | temp_ima_appraise);
> +	ima_appraise |= temp_ima_appraise;

You're correct that build_ima_appraise isn't being used any longer,
but ima_appraise isn't defined as __ro_after_init.  Instead of
removing build_ima_appraise, does it make sense to set it?

Mimi

>  	if (!ima_appraise)
>  		ima_policy_flag &= ~IMA_APPRAISE;
>  }