The patch below was submitted to be applied to the 5.2-stable tree.
I fail to see how this patch meets the stable kernel rules as found at
Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst.
I could be totally wrong, and if so, please respond to
<stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> and let me know why this patch should be
applied. Otherwise, it is now dropped from my patch queues, never to be
seen again.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
>From 68f2529078f97dd4dc7f01bc4d495cf5f5814363 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 21:40:32 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] ima: Make arch_policy_entry static
Fix sparse warning:
security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c:202:23: warning:
symbol 'arch_policy_entry' was not declared. Should it be static?
Fixes: 6191706246de ("ima: add support for arch specific policies")
Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (linux-5.0)
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index 1cc822a59054..cd1b7281244e 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry secure_boot_rules[] __ro_after_init = {
};
/* An array of architecture specific rules */
-struct ima_rule_entry *arch_policy_entry __ro_after_init;
+static struct ima_rule_entry *arch_policy_entry __ro_after_init;
static LIST_HEAD(ima_default_rules);
static LIST_HEAD(ima_policy_rules);
