> From: linux-integrity-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-integrity- > ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds > Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:59 PM > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 10:03 AM Mimi Zohar <zo...@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > The main changes are extending the TPM 2.0 PCR banks with bank > > specific file hashes, calculating the "boot_aggregate" based on other > > TPM PCR banks, using the default IMA hash algorithm, instead of SHA1, > > as the basis for the cache hash table key, and preventing the mprotect > > syscall to circumvent an IMA mmap appraise policy rule. > > I'm not sure why I didn't notice this during my test builds, but this > results in a new warning: > > WARNING: modpost: vmlinux.o(.text+0x496264): Section mismatch in > reference from the function ima_calc_boot_aggregate() to the function > .init.text:ima_pcrread() > The function ima_calc_boot_aggregate() references > the function __init ima_pcrread(). > This is often because ima_calc_boot_aggregate lacks a __init > annotation or the annotation of ima_pcrread is wrong. > > and I think the warning is real - and the problem is real, not just a > missing annotation. > > It looks like ima_calc_boot_aggregate() may be called not only at init > time (ima_eventdigest_init() is referenced from "struct > ima_template_field supported_fields[]", for example) > > So calling an __init function would be very wrong, because it might be > gone by that time. > > Hmm?
Right, I also missed it. Will send a patch soon. Roberto HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063 Managing Director: Li Peng, Li Jian, Shi Yanli
