lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Feb]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 07/13] module: Move extra signature support out of core code
On Thu 2022-02-10 13:01 +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Why do patches 7 to 13 have a Reply-to:
> 20220209170358.3266629-1-atomlin@redhat.com and not patches 1 to 6 ?

Christophe,

Please disregard this mishap. Unfortunately, at the time I hit the relay
quota.

> > diff --git a/include/linux/module.h b/include/linux/module.h
> > index fd6161d78127..aea0ffd94a41 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/module.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/module.h
> > @@ -863,6 +863,7 @@ static inline bool module_sig_ok(struct module *module)
> > {
> > return true;
> > }
> > +#define sig_enforce false
> sig_enforce is used only in signing.c so it should be defined there
> exclusively.

Agreed.

> And checkpatch is not happy:
>
> CHECK: Please use a blank line after function/struct/union/enum declarations
> #27: FILE: include/linux/module.h:866:
> }
> +#define sig_enforce false

Ok.


Kind regards,

--
Aaron Tomlin
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-02-11 14:53    [W:0.134 / U:0.888 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site