On 3/10/06, Xiaolan Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, Arnaldo, > > This looks a bit surprising because that 2 lines should have already been > in the patch (lsm-secpeer) that this patch (lsm-secpeer-unix) depends on. > See below:
Look at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/davem/net-2.6.17.git;a=blob;h=a326d6e0b6d79848955d2d41eabef9074030dffd;hb=4d9e17981639d3764cff77d5cc141a42d44e2d2c;f=security/dummy.c These bits are not there, something happened, perhaps David had to do some last minute change and this problem slip, anyway, I have the fix in my net-2.6.17.git tree and will push to David later, thanks for confirming that the change is indeed what I thought it was. :-) > thanks, > Catherine > > > diff -puN security/dummy.c~lsm-secpeer security/dummy.c > --- linux-2.6.16-rc1/security/dummy.c~lsm-secpeer 2006-02-17 > 16:20:56.000000000 -0500 > +++ linux-2.6.16-rc1-cxzhang/security/dummy.c 2006-02-03 > 14:44:17.000000000 -0500 > @@ -763,8 +763,14 @@ static int dummy_socket_sock_rcv_skb (st > return 0; > } > > -static int dummy_socket_getpeersec(struct socket *sock, char __user > *optval, > - int __user *optlen, unsigned len) > +static int dummy_socket_getpeersec_stream(struct socket *sock, char > __user *optval, > + int __user *optlen, unsigned > len) > +{ > + return -ENOPROTOOPT; > +} > + > +static int dummy_socket_getpeersec_dgram(struct sk_buff *skb, char > **secdata, > + u32 *seclen) > { > return -ENOPROTOOPT; > } > @@ -1002,7 +1008,8 @@ void security_fixup_ops (struct security > set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, socket_getsockopt); > set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, socket_shutdown); > set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, socket_sock_rcv_skb); > - set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, socket_getpeersec); > + set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, socket_getpeersec_stream); > + set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, socket_getpeersec_dgram); > set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, sk_alloc_security); > set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, sk_free_security); > set_to_dummy_if_null(ops, sk_getsid); > diff -puN net/core/sock.c~lsm-secpeer net/core/sock.c > --- linux-2.6.16-rc1/net/core/sock.c~lsm-secpeer 2006-02-01 > 18:31:21.000000000 -0500 > +++ linux-2.6.16-rc1-cxzhang/net/core/sock.c 2006-02-01 > 18:31:33.000000000 -0500 > @@ -616,7 +616,7 @@ int sock_getsockopt(struct socket *sock, > break; > > case SO_PEERSEC: > - return security_socket_getpeersec(sock, optval, > optlen, len); > + return security_socket_getpeersec_stream(sock, > optval, optlen, len); > > default: > return(-ENOPROTOOPT); > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 03/10/2006 02:16:44 PM: > > > On 3/10/06, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 3/10/06, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 3/10/06, Xiaolan Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I will work on a fix. > > > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > More breakage, this time with "make allmodconfig", please fix. > > > > > > - Arnaldo > > > > > > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.17/security/dummy.c: In > > > function 'security_fixup_ops': > > > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.17/security/dummy.c:1011: > > > error: 'struct security_operations' has no member named > > > 'socket_getpeersec' > > > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.17/security/dummy.c:1011: > > > error: 'struct security_operations' has no member named > > > 'socket_getpeersec' > > > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.17/security/dummy.c:1011: > > > error: 'dummy_socket_getpeersec' undeclared (first use in this > > > function) > > > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.17/security/dummy.c:1011: > > > error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once > > > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.17/security/dummy.c:1011: > > > error: for each function it appears in.) > > > > Is the attached patch enough? If so I can put into my net-2.6.17 tree > and push > > to DaveM in half an hour or so after I check that there is no more > > build breakage > > in netland. > > > > - Arnaldo > > [attachment "c.patch" deleted by Xiaolan Zhang/Watson/IBM] > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
