On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 7:14 AM Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> > > > index 993d0f1915ff..c8591406c0e2 100644
> > > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> > > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
> > > > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ static int __init ima_add_boot_aggregate(void)
> > > > struct ima_template_entry *entry;
> > > > struct integrity_iint_cache tmp_iint, *iint = &tmp_iint;
> > > > struct ima_event_data event_data = {iint, NULL, boot_aggregate_name,
> > > > - NULL, 0, NULL};
> > > > + NULL, 0, NULL, NULL, 0};
> > >
> > > here, don't belong in this patch. It belongs in "IMA: support for per
> > > policy rule template formats", in case it should ever be backported.
> > > Please post this as a separate patch, that will be squashed with
> > > "IMA: support for per policy rule template formats".
> >
> > My mistake. I should have picked up Thaigo's "ima: Use designated
> > initializers for struct ima_event_data". Please drop these changes
> > instead.
>
> Sorry for the confusion. I just pushed out Thiago's patch.
>
Just to clarify:
- no split up of patch is needed.
- only formatting needs to cleaned up.
Apologies for the formatting issues, my editor switches back to
tab as 4 chars.
Thanks,
Prakhar Srivastava
> thanks,
>
> Mimi
>
