Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 12/22/20 4:19 PM, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
>> Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
>>> index 6ebefec616e4..7c3947ad3773 100644
>>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
>>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
>>> @@ -24,10 +24,6 @@
>>> #include "../integrity.h"
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC
>>> -#include <asm/ima.h>
>>> -#endif
>>> -
>>> enum ima_show_type { IMA_SHOW_BINARY, IMA_SHOW_BINARY_NO_FIELD_LEN,
>>> IMA_SHOW_BINARY_OLD_STRING_FMT, IMA_SHOW_ASCII };
>>> enum tpm_pcrs { TPM_PCR0 = 0, TPM_PCR8 = 8, TPM_PCR10 = 10 };
>> This belongs in patch 1.
>
> No - the reference to "asm/ima.h" cannot be removed in Patch #1 since
> ima_get_kexec_buffer() and ima_free_kexec_buffer() are still declared in
> this header. They are moved in this patch only (Patch #2).
Indeed, you are right. My mistake.
>>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>>> index 38bcd7543e27..8a6712981dee 100644
>>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
>>> #include <linux/seq_file.h>
>>> #include <linux/vmalloc.h>
>>> #include <linux/kexec.h>
>>> +#include <linux/of.h>
>>> #include <linux/ima.h>
>>> #include "ima.h"
>> This include isn't necessary.
>
> This change is necessary because ima_get_kexec_buffer() and
> ima_free_kexec_buffer() are now declared in "linux/of.h".
You are right here as well. Before I made the suggestion, I had tested
building the kernel without the include above and it worked fine, but
that's because <linux/of.h> is being included indirectly by some other
header file. It's better to include it explicitly.
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
