On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 10:28 PM James Carter <jwcart2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> A parameter of a macro was only considered to be a duplicate if it
> matched both the name and flavor of another parameter. While it is
> true that CIL is able to differentiate between those two parameters,
> there is no reason to use the same name for two macro parameters and
> it is better to return an error for what is probably an error.
>
> Remove the check of the flavors when checking for duplicate parameters.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Carter <jwcart2@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> libsepol/cil/src/cil_build_ast.c | 8 +++-----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/libsepol/cil/src/cil_build_ast.c b/libsepol/cil/src/cil_build_ast.c
> index 307b1ee3..fcecdc4f 100644
> --- a/libsepol/cil/src/cil_build_ast.c
> +++ b/libsepol/cil/src/cil_build_ast.c
> @@ -5304,11 +5304,9 @@ int cil_gen_macro(struct cil_db *db, struct cil_tree_node *parse_current, struct
> struct cil_list_item *curr_param;
> cil_list_for_each(curr_param, macro->params) {
> if (param->str == ((struct cil_param*)curr_param->data)->str) {
> - if (param->flavor == ((struct cil_param*)curr_param->data)->flavor) {
> - cil_log(CIL_ERR, "Duplicate parameter\n");
> - cil_destroy_param(param);
> - goto exit;
> - }
> + cil_log(CIL_ERR, "Duplicate parameter\n");
> + cil_destroy_param(param);
> + goto exit;
> }
> }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Acked-by: Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace at redhat dot com>
Software Engineer, Security Technologies
Red Hat, Inc.
