Re: [PATCH] Fix security.h compilation with !CONFIG_SECURITY

[Vegard Nossum]

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This recent patch
>
> commit 5cd9c58fbe9ec92b45b27e131719af4f2bd9eb40
> Author: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date:   Thu Aug 14 11:37:28 2008 +0100
>
>    security: Fix setting of PF_SUPERPRIV by __capable()
>
> broke compilation with !CONFIG_SECURITY:
>
> linux/include/linux/security.h: In function 'security_ptrace_traceme':
> linux/include/linux/security.h:1760: error: 'parent' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> Add the obvious fix.
>
> Cc: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  include/linux/security.h |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/security.h b/include/linux/security.h
> index 2ee5ecf..0cc23a1 100644
> --- a/include/linux/security.h
> +++ b/include/linux/security.h
> @@ -1757,7 +1757,7 @@ static inline int security_ptrace_may_access(struct task_struct *child,
>
>  static inline int security_ptrace_traceme(struct task_struct *child)
>  {
> -       return cap_ptrace_traceme(parent);
> +       return cap_ptrace_traceme(child);
>  }
>
>  static inline int security_capget(struct task_struct *target,
> --

Oops. I just submitted a similar patch. But I think yours is wrong.

The argument name should be "parent", as in the definition that is
provided when CONFIG_SECURITY=y.

    int security_ptrace_traceme(struct task_struct *parent);

I'm sorry for the double submit.


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/