Re: linux-next: manual merge of the selinux tree with the security tree

[Paul Moore]

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:31 PM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the selinux tree got a conflict in:
>
>   security/selinux/hooks.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   6b4f3d01052a ("usb, signal, security: only pass the cred, not the secid, to kill_pid_info_as_cred and security_task_kill")
>
> from the security tree and commit:
>
>   6b6bc6205d98 ("selinux: wrap AVC state")
>
> from the selinux tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
>
> diff --cc security/selinux/hooks.c
> index fdd523e575e3,21b377aef69a..000000000000
> --- a/security/selinux/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/selinux/hooks.c
> @@@ -4050,11 -4164,10 +4170,12 @@@ static int selinux_task_kill(struct tas
>                 perm = PROCESS__SIGNULL; /* null signal; existence test */
>         else
>                 perm = signal_to_av(sig);
>  -      if (!secid)
>  +      if (!cred)
>                 secid = current_sid();
>  +      else
>  +              secid = cred_sid(cred);
> -       return avc_has_perm(secid, task_sid(p), SECCLASS_PROCESS, perm, NULL);
> +       return avc_has_perm(&selinux_state,
> +                           secid, task_sid(p), SECCLASS_PROCESS, perm, NULL);
>   }
>
>   static void selinux_task_to_inode(struct task_struct *p,

Thanks Stephen, that looks correct to me.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com