Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 04/12] integrity: restrict INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE to restrict_link_by_ca | From | Eric Snowberg <> | Date | Thu, 9 Sep 2021 11:53:14 -0600 |
| |
> On Sep 9, 2021, at 11:25 AM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2021-09-07 at 12:01 -0400, Eric Snowberg wrote: >> Set the restriction check for INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE keys to >> restrict_link_by_ca. This will only allow CA keys into the machine >> keyring. >> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com> > > Normally the new function, in this case the restriction, and usage > should be defined together. Any reason why 3/12 and 4/12 are two > separate patches?
I split them since they cross subsystems.
> I would squash them together.
But I can squash them together in the next round.
> >> --- >> v1: Initial version >> v2: Added !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING check so mok >> keyring gets created even when it isn't enabled >> v3: Rename restrict_link_by_system_trusted_or_ca to restrict_link_by_ca >> v4: removed unnecessary restriction->check set >> v5: Rename to machine keyring >> --- >> security/integrity/digsig.c | 8 ++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/security/integrity/digsig.c b/security/integrity/digsig.c >> index 5a75ac2c4dbe..2b75bbbd9e0e 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/digsig.c >> +++ b/security/integrity/digsig.c >> @@ -132,14 +132,18 @@ int __init integrity_init_keyring(const unsigned int id) >> goto out; >> } >> >> - if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING)) >> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING) && id != INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE) > > Over 80 chars, please split the line
I thought the 80 char limit was relaxed? But if it hasn’t I can change this too. Thanks.
| |