Re: [PATCH] module: Only declare set_module_sig_enforced when CONFIG_MODULE_SIG=y

[Daniel Gomez]

On 31/10/2025 09.09, Coiby Xu wrote:
> Currently, set_module_sig_enforced is declared as long as CONFIG_MODULES
> is enabled. This can lead to a linking error if
> set_module_sig_enforced is called with CONFIG_MODULE_SIG=n,
> 
>     ld: security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.o: in function `ima_appraise_measurement':
>     security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c:587:(.text+0xbbb): undefined reference to `set_module_sig_enforced'

It's a bit unclear whether you're referring to a current upstream issue (which I
couldn't find as of -rc3), or if this is just a hypothetical scenario.

> 
> So only declare set_module_sig_enforced when CONFIG_MODULE_SIG is
> enabled.

I only see cases where code has a safeguard like in
security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c:71

		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULE_SIG))
			set_module_sig_enforced();

> 
> Note this issue hasn't caused a real problem because all current callers
> of set_module_sig_enforced e.g. security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c
> depend on CONFIG_MODULE_SIG=y.

I think the correct term we should use here is runtime safeguard. The code does
not actually depend on that config, nor is there any dep in Kconfig.

> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202510030029.VRKgik99-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/
> Signed-off-by: Coiby Xu <coxu@xxxxxxxxxx>


Just minor nits regarding the commit message structure. This change should allow
us to remove the safeguard from users of set_module_sig_enforced().


Other than that, LGTM,

Reviewed-by: Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@xxxxxxxxxxx>