On 19.05.20 09:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.05.2020 09:52, Jürgen Groß wrote:
On 19.05.20 09:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.05.2020 09:20, Juergen Gross wrote:
--- a/xen/xsm/flask/Makefile
+++ b/xen/xsm/flask/Makefile
@@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ $(subst include/,%/,$(AV_H_FILES)): $(AV_H_DEPEND)
$(mkaccess) FORCE
obj-bin-$(CONFIG_XSM_FLASK_POLICY) += flask-policy.o
flask-policy.o: policy.bin
+flask-policy.S: $(XEN_ROOT)/xen/tools/binfile
+ $(XEN_ROOT)/xen/tools/binfile -i $@ policy.bin xsm_flask_init_policy
I realize the script gets installed as executable, but such
permissions can get lost. Typically I think we invoke the shell
instead, with the script as first argument. Thoughts? Would
affect patch 8 then as well. Sorry for noticing this only now.
Shall I resend or would you do that while committing?
In patch 8 I'd be fine adding $(SHELL). Here, though, the question is
whether it should be $(SHELL) or $(CONFIG_SHELL) - I don't have any
idea why the latter exists in the first place. Daniel?
Why would different shells be needed in the two patches?
The binfile script is rather simple without any bash-isms in it (AFAICT
CONFIG_SHELL seems to prefer bash). So $(SHELL) should be fine IMO.
Juergen
