Re: [PATCH 11/12] IMA: turn ima_policy_flags into __wr_after_init

[Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On 20/12/2018 19:30, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> 
> Hello Igor,
> 
> Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
>> index 59d834219cd6..5f4e13e671bf 100644
>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c
>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/scatterlist.h>
>>   #include <linux/slab.h>
>>   #include <linux/err.h>
>> +#include <linux/prmem.h>
>>
>>   #include "ima.h"
>>
>> @@ -98,9 +99,9 @@ void __init ima_load_x509(void)
>>   {
>>   	int unset_flags = ima_policy_flag & IMA_APPRAISE;
>>
>> -	ima_policy_flag &= ~unset_flags;
>> +	wr_assign(ima_policy_flag, ima_policy_flag & ~unset_flags);
>>   	integrity_load_x509(INTEGRITY_KEYRING_IMA, CONFIG_IMA_X509_PATH);
>> -	ima_policy_flag |= unset_flags;
>> +	wr_assign(ima_policy_flag, ima_policy_flag | unset_flags);
>>   }
>>   #endif
> 
> In the cover letter, you said:
> 
>> As the name implies, the write protection kicks in only after init()
>> is completed; before that moment, the data is modifiable in the usual
>> way.
> 
> Given that, is it still necessary or useful to use wr_assign() in a
> function marked with __init?

I might have been over enthusiastic of using the wr interface.
You are right, I can drop these two. Thank you.

--
igor