On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 01:52:09PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 19:22 +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:50:09AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > Stable team,
> > >
> > > Please backport these upstream commits to stable kernels:
> > > - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> > > ima_filter_rule_match()"
> > >
> > > Dependency on:
> > > - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
> > >
> > > Known minor merge conflicts:
> > > - Commit: 65603435599f ("ima: Fix trivial typos in the comments") fixed
> > > "refrences" spelling, causes a merge conflict.
> > > - Commit 28073eb09c5a ("ima: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang") adds
> > > a "break;" before "default:", causes a merge conflict.
>
> Up to linux-5.9.y, there are two merge conflicts - a spelling error and
> a missing "break" before "default:", which are the result of the above
> commits. Otherwise the two commits apply cleanly:
> - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
> - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()"
Again, this isn't going to work, I need backported commits that have
been tested and verified to work please.
>
> > > Simplifies backporting to linux-5.4.y:
> > > - 465aee77aae8 ("ima: Free the entire rule when deleting a list of
> > > rules")
> > > except for the line "kfree(entry->keyrings);" - introduced in 5.6.y.
> > > - 39e5993d0d45 ("ima: Shallow copy the args_p member of
> > > ima_rule_entry.lsm elements")
> > > - b8867eedcf76 ("ima: Rename internal filter rule functions")
> > > - f60c826d0318 ("ima: Use kmemdup rather than kmalloc+memcpy")
> >
> > I'm sorry, but I'm confused.
> >
> > What exact commits are needed in what order for which stable trees?
>
> The above 4 commits are needed, in the order listed, for linux-5.4.y
> before applying these two commits:
> - d57378d3aa4d ("ima: Simplify ima_lsm_copy_rule")
> - c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()"
>
> > > A patch for kernels prior to commit b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm
> > > policy update notifier") will be posted separately.
> >
> > But that commit has been backported to 4.19.y and newer stable trees,
> > right?
>
> No, b16942455193 ("ima: use the lsm policy update notifier") was
> upstreamed in linux-5.3.y and has not been backported to linux-4.19.y.
> We're still determining for linux-4.19.y the best way to address the
> bug that commit c7423dbdbc9e ("ima: Handle -ESTALE returned by
> ima_filter_rule_match()") addresses.
It would be easiest if you just send a series of backported commits that
you have tested, otherwise I will get the above instructions wrong :)
thanks,
greg k-h
